Articles Tagged with Morgan Stanley

shutterstock_1832893The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints against broker Clarence Mark Tingle (Tingle). In addition, The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an enforcement action (FINRA No. 2014042951501) against Tingle. There are at least 2 customer complaints against Tingle and 1 regulatory action. The customer complaints against Tingle allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unauthorized trading, excessively traded accounts, and failed to follow instructions among other claims.

The most recent customer complaint was filed in October 2014 and alleges excessive trading from September 2011 through July 2014 causing $40,954 in damages.

In a FINRA regulatory action against Tingle, the agency alleged that between August 2009 and June 2014, Tingle at times exercised discretion in the accounts of six customers without first obtaining the customers’ written authorization. Although the customers orally authorized the use of discretion Tingle failed to obtain their written authorization in violation of industry rules.

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_26269225The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are announcing their investigation into potential securities claims against brokerage firms over sales practices related to the recommendation of structured notes linked to oil & gas. These structured products are issued by Barclays (NYSE:BCS), Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS), Deutsche Bank (NYSE:DB), UBS (NYSE:UBS), Citigroup (NYSE:C), Bank of America Merrill Lynch (NYSE:BAC), JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM), Credit Suisse (NYSE:CS), and BNP Paribas among others firms. The structured notes are issued under the names Principal Protected Notes, Principal Protected Booster Notes, Buffered Bullish Notes, Accelerated Return Notes, Strategic Return Notes, Capped Leverage Return Notes, Target Term Securities, Market Linked Notes, E-Tracs, Return Optimization Notes, Auto-Callable Securities, Performance Leveraged Upside Securities (PLUS), and Equity Linked Securities (ELKs).

Brokers often pitch structured products as providing “downside protection” against losses to a related index while allowing modest up side gain potential. However, today investors are waking up to the fact that structured products linked to the oil market are offering no protection. According to Bloomberg, retail structured notes meant to protect against a drop in crude failed to do so. Of the $437.1 million in oil related structured products that have matured this year, 44 percent, or $194.3 million of principal has been lost. The largest deal in the oil space is a $104.6 million Barclays issuance in April 2014 that has lost 42 percent of its value.

Indeed, Bloomberg found that all but three of the 39 notes examined protected against a certain percentage of losses, typically in the range of 10 percent to 20 percent. These notes quickly breached these loss limits as crude oil prices have declined more than 60 percent. Once the securities breached the “soft barriers” investors became exposed to the full loss at maturity and the value of the notes became wholly dependent on the change in oil prices.

shutterstock_24531604According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Hilary Zimmerman (Zimmerman) has been the subject of at least 6 customer complaints over the course of her career. Customers have filed complaints against Zimmerman alleging securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, negligence, unauthorized trading, misrepresentations, churning and excessive trading, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty, among other claims.

Zimmerman entered the securities industry in 1991. From December 2007 until present Zimmerman has been associated with Morgan Stanley out of the firm’s Ridgeland, Mississippi office.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. In order to make suitable recommendations the broker must have a reasonable basis for recommending the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation of the investments properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. In addition, the broker must also understand the customer’s specific investment objectives to determine whether or not the specific product or security being recommended is appropriate for the customer based upon their needs.

shutterstock_154681727According to news sources, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are investigating how the hedge fund Canarsie Capital lost nearly all of the $60 million capital in just three weeks of trading. The fund was run by Owen Li (Li), and Ken deRegt (deRegt). Canarsie Capital was named for the Brooklyn neighborhood where Li grew up and was launched in January 2013 and had offices in midtown Manhattan, New York. Li previously worked for Raj Rajaratnam’s (Rajaratnam) Galleon Group. Rajaratnam is currently serving an 11 year sentence following his May 2011 conviction on nine counts of securities fraud and five counts of conspiracy. The claims against him relate to $63.8 million in illicit profit from 2003 to 2009 by trading in stocks such as eBay Inc, Goldman Sachs Group Inc and Google Inc. Li cofounded the Canarsie Capital with his former Stanford University roommate, Eric deRegt and Eric’s father who ran Morgan Stanley’s fixed-income business.

According to filings the minimum investment accepted from an outside investor in the fund was $1 million. At its peak, Canarsie Capital had managed around $98 million in assets and had some well-known contributors. Goldman Sachs was the fund’s prime broker and clears and settles trades for the hedge fund starting in the fall of 2014. The Goldman Sachs switch came after the fund was dropped in March 2014, by Morgan Stanley’s prime brokerage over concerns with the fund’s risk practices.

On January 20, 2015, Li, wrote an apology letter to investors telling them that he “engaged in a series of aggressive transactions” during the first three weeks of 2015 that resulted in losing all but $200,000 of the fund’s capital, a 99.7% loss. According to the letter, Li engaged in aggressive trading in an attempt to recuperate prior losses the fund suffered in the fund in December 2014. At this time it’s unclear what the trading strategy was that Li engaged in January of this year. The only details in the letter concerning the securities themselves are that they included “options with strike prices pegged to the broader market increasing in value” and “some direct positions.”

shutterstock_184433255The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought and enforcement action against broker  Michael Highfill (Highfill) (FINRA No. 2015045652501) resulting in a bar from the securities industry alleging that Highfill failed to provide FINRA staff with information and documents requested. The failure to provide those documents and information to FINRA resulted in an automatic bar from the industry. FINRA’s document requests related to the regulators investigation into claims the Highfill solicited and accepted a loan from an elderly customer and that he also failed to disclose an outside business activity to his member firm.

FINRA’s investigation appears to stem from Highfill’s termination from Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (Merrill Lynch) in May 2015. At that time Merrill Lynch filed a Form U5 termination notice with FINRA stating in part that the firm discharged Highfill under circumstances where there was allegations that Highfill solicited a loan from a client and failed to disclose outside business activities. It is unclear the nature of the outside business activities from publicly available information at this time.

Highfill entered the securities industry in 1999. From August 2005 until August 2008, Highfill was associated with Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated. Thereafter, from July, 2008, until May 2015, Highfill was associated as a registered representative with Merrill Lynch out of the firm’s Ridgeland, Mississippi office.

shutterstock_189006551The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned and barred broker Kenneth Hornyak (Hornyak) (Case No. 2013038511901) alleging that the broker failed to respond the regulator’s requests for documents and information. FINRA’s investigation appeared to focus on claims that Hornyak engaged in potential discretionary trading, unauthorized trading, and unsuitable short-term trading in Unit Investment Trusts (UITs). On May 11, 2015, Hornyak informed FINRA that he would not appear for questioning and the regulator subsequently barred the broker.

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by FINRA Hornyak has been the subject of at least four customer complaints, one regulatory action, and two employment terminations for cause. Customers have filed complaints against Hornyak alleging a litany of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, unauthorized trades, churning, and excessive sales charges among other claims.

Hornyak entered the securities industry in 1998 with Morgan Stanley. From March 2006, until January 2014, Hornyak was associated with Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated. In January 2014, Stifel, Nicolaus terminated Hornyak for cause alleging that Hornyak was terminated because of violation of firm policies regarding exercising discretion without written authorization.

shutterstock_27597505According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker David Peirce (Peirce) has been the subject of at least four customer complaints. The customer complaints against Peirce allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, churning (excessive trading), among other claims..

Peirce entered the securities industry in 1989. From April 2004, until February 2009, Peirce was registered with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney (Morgan Stanley). From June 2009 onward Peirce was associated with RBC Capital Markets, LLC (RBC).

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. Many of the claims against Peirce involving claims of churning and excessive trading. When brokers engage in churning the investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is transacted to profit the broker through the generation of commission payments. 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_180342155The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned (Case No. 2013036262101) broker Sylvester King Jr. (King) concerning allegations that from July 2009, through November 2012, while King was registered Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC (Morgan Stanley) and later Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (Wells Fargo), circumvented Wells Fargo’s policies and procedures by assisting another broker in concealing nearly $400,000 in loans to three firm customers, loaned $25,000 to a customer without permission, participated in an undisclosed private securities transaction, otherwise referred to in the industry as “selling away”, where eight customers invested more than $3 million, and provided false information to Morgan Stanley on two separate questionnaires.

King entered the securities industry in 1999. From 2006, until June 2009, King was registered with Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (Citigroup). From June 2009, until October 2010, King was associated with Morgan Stanley. Thereafter, from October 2011, until May 2015, King was associated with brokerage firm Wells Fargo. On April 27, 2015, Wells Fargo filed a notice of Termination Form U-5 on the same day that FINRA entered into its agreement with King in which King accepted a fine and sanctions stating that King was discharged from the firm because of the settlement with FINRA which included an 18 month suspension. Thereafter, FINRA filed a second regulatory action stating that King failed to pay the $35,000 required as part of the settlement as of July 28, 2015.

FINRA alleged that in 2009, King and his partner referred to by the initials “AP”, formed PKG, a d/b/a branch office located in Florida registered through Morgan Stanley and then Wells Fargo. PKG allegedly provided financial “concierge” services to professional athletes who played in the NFL and the NBA. FINRA alleged that King committed the violations contained in the complaint for the supposed benefit, of several of these athletes.

shutterstock_188269637According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Mark Kaplan (Kaplan) has been the subject of at least four customer complaints and one termination. The customer complaints against Kaplan allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, churning (excessive trading), unauthorized trading, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and false statements, among other claims

Kaplan entered the securities industry in 1989. From September 2005, until June 2009, Kaplan was registered with Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (Citigroup). From June 2009, until April 2011, Kaplan was associated with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney (Morgan Stanley). In March 2011, Morgan Stanley filed a notice of Termination Form U-5 stating that Kaplan was discharged because of a customer complaint that was made against Kaplan. The firm also stated that it had other concerns regarding activity in client accounts. In response, Kaplan stated that the allegations by Morgan Stanley were unfounded and that the firm had approved all of the activity in client accounts. Since March 2011, Kaplan has been associated with Vanderbilt Securities, LLC.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. Many of the claims against Kaplan involving claims of churning and excessive trading. When brokers engage in churning the investment trading activity in the client’s account serves no reasonable purpose for the investor and is transacted to profit the broker through the generation of commission payments. 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.

Contact Information