Articles Tagged with investment fraud attorney

shutterstock_188141822The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2012034393401) against broker Daniel Barthole (Barthole) resulting in a monetary sanction and a suspension. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Barthole has been the subject of at least 2 customer complaints. The customer complaints against Barthole allege unsuitable investments, churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, fraud, and unauthorized trading among other claims. The most recent complaint against Barthole alleged $227,632 in damages concerning unauthorized ETF trading and churning from February 2012 through September 2014. The claim was later withdrawn.

FINRA’s findings stated that Barthole consented to a finding that he together with two other brokers attempted to settle a customer complaint away from their brokerage firm by agreeing to pay $4,000 to a customer and by sending $1,500 in cash to the customer.

Barthole entered the securities industry in 2009. From April 2009 until February 2015, Barthole was associated with Woodstock Financial Group, Inc. Since February 2015, Barthole has been registered with National Securities Corporation out of the firm’s New York, New York office location.

shutterstock_175993865The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating Daniel Kasbar (Kasbar) bar from the securities industry. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015045744901) against Kasbar alleging that between 2010 and 2015, Kasbar engaged in an outside business activity beyond the scope of the approvals provided by his FINRA member firm – also referred to as “selling away” in the industry – HD Vest Investment Services (HD Vest) and LPL Financial, LLC (LPL). On September 17, 2015 FINRA requested that Kasbar provide documents and information. Kasbar did not provide any of the requested documents and information drawing an automatic bar from the industry.

Kasbar entered the securities industry in February 2011. Between February 2011 and March 2014, Kasbar was associated with HD Vest. From March 2014 until June 2015, Kasbar was associated with brokerage firm LPL until he was discharged from the firm.

It is unclear from the regulatory filings what the nature of the outside business activities were but from publicly available information, Kasbar’s brokercheck disclosures reveal several outside business activities including Kasbar Financial, Daniel G. Kasbar & Company, Inc. – a general contracting company, Emerald Village Professional Plaza, Kasbar Consulting – a tax prep, accounting, bookkeeping firm, and A R K Construction Company, Inc.

shutterstock_177082523The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015044589701) against broker David Khezri (Khezri) resulting in a monetary sanction and suspension. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Khezri has been the subject of at least 1 customer complaint. The customer complaints against Khezri alleges excessive trading among other claims.

FINRA’s findings stated that Khezri consented to sanctions that he improperly exercised discretion by effecting around 100 trades for six customers without obtaining written authorization from the customers. The firm also did not accept the accounts as discretionary. FINRA alleged that Khezri exercised discretion by executing trades days after his customers provided him oral authority. However, FINRA found that Khezri’s firm did not permit discretionary trading except for registered investment advisors (RIA) trading in the accounts of their advisory clients and Khezri was not an RIA.

Advisors are not allowed to engage in unauthorized trading. Such trading occurs when a broker sells securities without the prior authority from the investor. All brokers are under an obligation to first discuss trades with the investor before executing them under NYSE Rule 408(a) and FINRA Rules 2510(b). These rules explicitly prohibit brokers from making discretionary trades in a customers’ non-discretionary accounts. The SEC has also found that unauthorized trading to be fraudulent nature because no disclosure could be more important to an investor than to be made aware that a trade will take place.

shutterstock_103681238The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought and enforcement action (FINRA No. 2015045289901) against broker Jeffrey Snyder (Snyder) resulting a permanent bar from the securities industry. In addition, according to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA, Snyder has been the subject of at least 6 customer complaints, and 1 regulatory event. The customer complaints against Snyder allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, engaged in churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, and unauthorized trading other claims.

FINRA’s findings stated that although Snyder appeared for an on-the-record interview, he refused to respond to certain questions concerning allegations that he paid a customer compensation for investment losses without the knowledge or authorization of his member firm. Snyder’s refusal resulted in an automatic bar.

An examination of Snyder’s employment history reveals that Snyder moves from troubled firm to troubled firm. The pattern of brokers moving in this way is sometimes called “cockroaching” within the industry. See More Than 5,000 Stockbrokers From Expelled Firms Still Selling Securities, The Wall Street Journal, (Oct. 4, 2013). In Snyder’s 12 year career he has worked at 6 different firms. Snyder entered the securities industry in 2003. From February 2006, through June 2008, Snyder was associated with New Castle Financial Services LLC. Thereafter from June 2008 until August 2008, Snyder was a registered representative of The Concord Equity Group, LLC. From August 2008, until April 2012, Snyder was registered with Spartan Capital Securities, LLC. From April 2012 until April 2015, Snyder was associated with Rockwell Global Capital LLC. Finally, in March 2015, Snyder was registered with Network 1 Financial Securities Inc. until September 2015 out of the firm’s Danbury, Connecticut office location.

shutterstock_174922268The securities and investment attorneys of Gana Weinstein LLP are interested in speaking with clients of John McKinstry Jr. (McKinstry). According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) McKinstry has been the subject of at least 5 customer complaints, 2 regulatory actions, and two employment terminations. The customer complaints against McKinstry allege securities law violations that claim unsuitable investments and churning among other claims.

The most recent complaint was filed in July 2015, and alleged $11,400 in damages due to claims that the broker made unsuitable investments and recommendations considering the age and risk tolerance of the client. Also in July 2015, another customer filed a complaint alleging that McKinstry made unsuitable investment recommendations causing alleged damages of $216,000.

In addition, in August 2015, McKinstry’s brokerage firm Moloney Securities Co., Inc. (Moloney Securities) terminated McKinstry concerning allegations that the firm had conducted an internal review concerning customer complaints and a FINRA exam.

shutterstock_183554579The securities and investment attorneys of Gana Weinstein LLP are interested in speaking with clients of Kirk Gill (Gill). According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Gill has been the subject of at least 7 customer complaints. The customer complaints against Gill allege securities law violations that claim unsuitable investments, misrepresentations, unauthorized investments, and breach of fiduciary duty among other claims.

The most recent complaint was filed in July 2015, and alleged $300,000 in damages due to claims that the broker, from 2007 to November 2014 made unsuitable investments and recommendations to the client. In April 2015, another customer filed a complaint alleging that Gill, from October 2011, until November 2014, made unsuitable investment recommendations causing alleged damages of $450,000. Gill denied the claims made by this investor and seeks an expungement of this case from his record. In December 2013, a customer filed a complaint against Gill alleging that the client was not properly advised concerning high risk and volatile stocks causing losses of $100,000.

Gill entered the securities industry in 1992. From July 2007 onward Gill has been associated with Morgan Stanley out of the firm’s Tucson, Arizona branch office location.

shutterstock_103476707In a memo available online, Dawson James Securities, Inc. (Dawson James) stated that it acted as the sole underwriter for a February 25, 2015 offering for Great Basin Scientific, Inc. (Great Basin) (stock symbol: GBSN). Great Basin is a molecular diagnostics company that commercializes technologies that improve ease-of-use and delivers sample-to-result molecular diagnostic testing. According to Dawson James, at the time of the offering, Great Basin traded at $2.55 and had a market cap of approximately $15 million. Despite having only a market capitalization of only $15 million Dawson James rose $24 million of up to 2,724,000 units at $8.80 per unit price of Series E preferred stock and eight Series C warrants. Each share of Series E preferred stock was to be convertible into four common stock shares.

The Dawson James offering has many signs of a classic pump and dump penny stock scheme. After the offering the stock price for the company reach a high of almost $5 in April 2015. However, since that time the price of Great Basin has collapsed to about only $.06 per share wiping out shareholders. Back in April 2015, Dawson James claimed that Great Basin had announced a strong quarter and updated investors on their progress and receiving of a significant patent award.

In a Seeking Alpha article, a writer stated that the Dawson James offering gave cause for concern due to Dawson James’ past regulatory infractions and its association with one of its previous brokers who was arrested in connection with a nationwide Ponzi Scheme. In addition, the Seeking Alpha article cited other instances where Dawson James has had other investment banking relationships with other stocks that considered to be pump and dumps as well as with a Chinese company accused of fraud whose registration was revoked by the SEC. Importantly, prior to the Dawson James offering Great Basin had only 5 million outstanding shares and that the February 2015 secondary offering created convertible preferred stock and warrants that will allow an additional 35 million Great Basin shares that would undoubtedly flood the market and collapse the company’s stock.

shutterstock_156367568According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Edward Jeffery (Jeffery) has been the subject of one customer complaint and one regulatory action. The Customers complaint against Jeffery alleges securities law violations that focus primarily on churning and excessive trading. In addition to the churning claims, the customer have complained of unauthorized trading among other claims. In the regulatory action, FINRA alleged that from July 2004 through November 2007, Jeffery effected 682 discretionary transactions in a customer’s accounts without written discretionary authority and without having the customer’s accounts accepted as discretionary accounts in violation of NASD rules. As a result Jeffery was suspended for thirty days and a fine of $10,000.

Jeffery entered the securities industry in 1992 with Paulson Investment Company, Inc until April 2012. Thereafter, from Apirl 2012 until July 2015, Jeffery was a registered representative of JHS Capital Advisors, LLC. Finally, since July 2015, Jeffery has been associated with Aegis Capital Corp. where he remains registered out of the Portland, Oregon office location.

Churning is investment trading activity in the client’s account that serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is transacted solely to profit the broker. The elements to establish a churning claim, which is considered a species of securities fraud, are excessive transactions of securities, broker control over the account, and intent to defraud the investor by obtaining unlawful commissions. A similar claim, excessive trading, under FINRA’s suitability rule involves just the first two elements. Certain commonly used measures and ratios used to determine churning help evaluate a churning claim. These ratios look at how frequently the account is turned over plus whether or not the expenses incurred in the account made it unreasonable that the investor could reasonably profit from the activity.

shutterstock_20354401According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Todd Henrich (Henrich) has been hit with a couple customer complaints this year. Henrich’s record reveals a total of 2 customer complaints in his short four year career. Customers have filed complaints against Henrich alleging securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, churning, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and misrepresentations among other claims. Both claims have been filed against the broker since July 2015.

Henrich entered the securities industry in 2011 and became associated with National Securities Corporation (National Securities). In December 2011, Henrich became associated with Obsidian Financial Group, LLC until December 2012. At that time Henrich again became associated with National Securities and has been associated with that brokerage firm ever since.

Churning is investment trading activity in the client’s account that serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is transacted solely to profit the broker. The elements to establish a churning claim, which is considered a species of securities fraud, are excessive transactions of securities, broker control over the account, and intent to defraud the investor by obtaining unlawful commissions. A similar claim, excessive trading, under FINRA’s suitability rule involves just the first two elements. Certain commonly used measures and ratios used to determine churning help evaluate a churning claim. These ratios look at how frequently the account is turned over plus whether or not the expenses incurred in the account made it unreasonable that the investor could reasonably profit from the activity.

shutterstock_168478292The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought and enforcement action against broker Leonard Goldberg (Goldberg) (FINRA No. 2011026098504) alleging during the seven year period from August 2007 through August 2014, while he was registered with FINRA through J.P. Turner & Company, LLP (JP Turner) and Newport Coast Securities Inc. (Newport Coast) Goldberg caused over $123,600 in losses to five customers while making over $77,900 for himself by using discretion without authorization in connection with 300 mutual fund and Exchange Trading Fund (ETF) transactions to his benefit and the customers’ loss. FINRA also alleged that from August 2007 through February 2012, Goldberg used discretion to facilitate a scheme of effecting fraudulent and unsuitable short term switching of Class A mutual funds – a/k/a excessive trading activity or churning – in the accounts of the five customers. Finally, FINRA alleges that Goldberg also falsified firm documents in furtherance of his scheme.

Goldberg first became associated with a FINRA member in 1972. From July 2007, until October 2010, Goldberg was associated with JP Turner. Thereafter, from October 2010, until December 2014, Goldberg was associated with Newport Coast. According to BrokerCheck records Goldberg has had at least six customer complaints filed against him during his career.

According to FINRA, Goldberg’s fraudulent and unsuitable short term mutual fund switching scheme involved replacing one Class A mutual fund position with another one more than 90 times in a five year period. FINRA determined that the accounts held those mutual funds for an average of only five to six months before Goldberg switched the funds. FINRA also found that the customers generally trusted Goldberg to trade on their behalf in their accounts and he did not inform them in advance of the trades. In sum, FINRA determined that Goldberg’s mutual fund switching had no business purpose other than to generate commissions for himself through repeated fees and charges.

Contact Information