Wells Fargo

Why the Investing Public Falsely Believes Advisors Are Fiduciaries

May 13, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The investor advocacy bar association PIABA (the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association) has recently issued a report called “Major Investor Losses Due to Conflicted Advice: Brokerage Industry Advertising Creates the Illusion of Fiduciary Duty.” The PIABA report argues that the brokerage industry uses false advertising to convey to investors that the firms have a fiduciary duty to their clients only then to do a 180 turn when sued to claim that no such duty exists.

According to the report, some of the largest firms in the United States are falsely advertise in this fashion including Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Fidelity, Ameriprise, Allstate Financial, Berthel Fisher, and Charles Schwab. The report claimed that all of these firms “advertise in a fashion that is designed to lull investors into the belief that they are being offered the services of a fiduciary.”

In the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, the Dodd-Frank legislation authorized the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) to pass a fiduciary duty rule that would apply to brokers, as opposed to only financial advisors. Most investors do not realize and are usually shocked to learn that there broker only has an obligation to recommend “suitable” investments, and not to work in their client’s best interests. Currently, the fiduciary duty rule only applies to financial advisors (and brokers under certain circumstances).

Wells Fargo Broker Joseph DiRago Jr. Sanctioned for Unauthorized Trading

April 30, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) in an acceptance, waiver, and consent action (AWC) Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (Wells Fargo) broker Joseph DiRago Jr. (DiRago) concerning allegations that between June 2011, and October 2012, while registered with Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (Morgan Stanley), DiRago effected transactions exercising discretion without written authorization in one customer’s account in violation of NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b) and FINRA Rule 2010.

In addition, DiRago has been the subject of at least five customer complaints over the course of his career. These claims primarily involve claims of unsuitable investment recommendations and misrepresentations. All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. The number of complaints made by investors against DiRago is relatively large by industry standards. According to InvestmentNews, only about 12% of financial advisors have any type of disclosure event on their records. Brokers must disclose different types of events, not necessarily all of which are customer complaints. These disclosures can include IRS tax liens, judgments, and even criminal matters.

According to FINRA, NASD Conduct Rule 2510(b) provides that brokers cannot exercise any discretionary power in a customer’s account unless such customer has given prior written authorization and the account has been accepted by the firm as evidenced in writing by the member.

Broker Spotlight: Wells Fargo Advisor Marcus Debaise

March 30, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Marcus Debaise (Debaise) has been the subject of at least 14 different customer complaints over the course of his career. Beginning in 2011 and continuing into 2015, customers have been filing complaints against Debaise alleging that the broker made unsuitable investments and unauthorized trading in speculative securities that were inappropriate for the customer.

Debaise has been registered with FINRA since 1993. From 2003 until present Debaise has been registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (Wells Fargo).

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. Part of the suitability requirement is that the broker must have a reasonable basis to believe, based on appropriate research and diligence, that all recommendations are suitable for at least some investors. Thus, the product or investment strategy being recommended must be appropriate for at least some investors and the advisers must convey the potential risks and rewards before bringing it to an investor’s attention. Second, all brokers must have a reasonable basis to believe that the recommended investment strategy is suitable for the particular customer. The recommendation must be reasonable for the investor based upon the investor’s risk tolerance, investment objectives, age, financial circumstances, other investment holdings, and experience.

FINRA Bars Douglas Melzer Concerning Aquatic Synthesis Unlimited Investments

March 15, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned and barred broker Douglas Melzer (Melzer) concerning allegations that Melzer participated in four private securities transactions when four of his Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (Wells Fargo) customers invested $2,000,000 in a company called Aquatic Synthesis Unlimited (Aquatic Synthesis) through investment contracts that were not approved by Wells Fargo. According to FINRA, Melzer received at least $27,000 plus a 2.5% member interest in the investment as compensation for the recommendations. FINRA found that Melzer failed to provide written notice to the firm or receive approval prior to participating in the private securities transactions also known as “selling away” in the industry.

Aquatic Synthesis is a gas drilling waste water treatment facility located in Indiana County. According to news sources , in or about August 2013, after several spills and at least four violation orders, state environmental regulators have shut down the company’s operations. The state Department of Environmental Protection revoked Aquatic Synthesis’ permit and started to use the company’s $1 million bond to begin cleaning up the site.

In addition, FINRA found that in May 2011, the firm became aware that Melzer had requested that the broker codes on certain accounts be altered. These codes are used by Wells Fargo to determine the appropriate split of commissions between Melzer and his partners. By changing the code, Melzer caused commissions that should have been paid to one of Melzer’s partners to be attributed to Melzer without the partner’s knowledge.

LPL Financial Terminates Charles Fackrell Over Securities Fraud Claims

March 12, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

LPL Financial LLC (LPL) has terminated its former broker Charles Fackrell (Fackrell), registered with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), alleging that the broker engaged in unapproved private securities transactions (known in the industry as “selling away”) and also due to a felony arrest for obtaining property under false pretenses.

Fackrell entered the securities industry in 2007 and was registered with Morgan Stanley & Co., Incorporated. From July 2008 until December 2009, Fackrell was registered with SunTrust Investment Services, Inc. Thereafter, from December 2009, until June 2010, Fackrell was a broker with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC.

According to news sources, Fackrell was arrested in January and faces charges of fraud that police now allege involve more than $500,000. In February Fackrell was served warrants and his bond was set at $2.2 million. News reports state that the victims were unsuspecting investors in Yadkinville and surrounding counties.

FINRA Fines 10 Brokerage Firms $43.5 Million For Conflicts of Interests in Toys “R” Us IPO

January 16, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The merry go-round of Wall Street fraud continues. After the housing crisis where Wall Street sold terrible home loans to investors we’ve arrived back to dot.com era frauds of selling favorable research. Enter the recent fine imposed by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) that 10 of the largest brokerage firms were fined a total of $43.5 million for allowing their equity research analysts to solicit investment banking business by offering favorable research coverage in connection with the 2010 planned initial public offering of Toys “R” Us.

FINRA fines are as follows:

Barclays Capital Inc. – $5 million

Why Wall Street Fights Against the Fiduciary Standard

October 30, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

In the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, the Dodd-Frank legislation authorized the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) to pass a fiduciary duty rule that would apply to brokers, as opposed to only financial advisors. Most investors do not realize and are usually shocked to learn that there broker only has an obligation to recommend “suitable” investments, and not to work in their client’s best interests. Currently, the fiduciary duty rule only applies to financial advisors (and brokers under certain circumstances) – more commonly recognized by the public as advisors who charge a flat fee for their services as opposed to commissions.

The fact that the investing public has absolutely no clue how crucial the fiduciary duty is to protecting their retirement futures and holding Wall Street accountable for mishaps has prevented any serious public debate to combat the millions of dollars the industry has and will spend to kill this part of the law. True to form, recently the House of Representatives passed a budget that would prevent the SEC from imposing a fiduciary standard on brokers during the upcoming federal fiscal year beginning in October.

What’s the big deal you may ask? Why is the fiduciary standard important to me? Well there are many reasons but maybe one story will highlight how the brokerage industry is currently allowed to operate to put their interests ahead of their clients. As recently reported in Bloomberg and InvestmentNews, an undercover U.S. Labor Department economist exposed how brokerage firms sought out federal workers to roll over their 401(k)’s with the government to IRAs with the brokerage firm even though the result could increase the client’s annual costs by as much as 50 times!

Wells Fargo Broker Michael Frew Accused of Running Fictitious “Real Estate” Scam

July 14, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating claims that broker Michael Frew (Frew). Frew allegedly solicited millions of dollars from investors including his friends and family on claims that he said would use the money to invest in real estate to rehabilitate properties in areas hit by natural disasters. Frew has now accused been accused of orchestrating a Ponzi scheme and converting these funds. Recently, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has sanctioned and barred Frew concerning these allegations and for Frew’s failure to properly respond to the agencies investigation requests.

Our attorneys have significant experience recovering investor funds by holding brokerage firms and Ponzi schemer’s responsible. In a similar real estate related fraudulent investment scheme our attorneys obtained a $2.8 million award on behalf of a group of defrauded investors including $1.9 million in punitive damages. See Reuters, Arbitrator orders alleged Ponzi-schemer to pay $2.8 million (Aug. 8, 2013) and the Award here.

Frew entered the securities industry in 1975. From 1988 to 2003, Frew was associated with Prudential Securities Inc. In 2003, Frew became registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (Wells Fargo). According to FINRA, Wells Fargo permitted Frew to resign in January 2014 when Frew refused to provide the firm bank records the firm requested in their investigation into whether Frew had received funds from customers. In February 2014, FINRA began investigating whether Frew accepted loans from customers and potentially converted those funds. Thereafter, FINRA stated that between March and May 2014, Frew failed to fully respond to FINRA’s requests for documents and information and refused to appear for testimony. For failing to respond to FINRA’s requests, the agency imposed a permanent bar from the securities industry.

Wells Fargo Advisors Awarded Limited Recovery On Broker Promissory Note

June 18, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Recently, a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel rendered a decision concerning Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC’s (Wells Fargo) claims against its former broker Steven Grundstedt (Grundstedt) for breach of three promissory notes. FINRA Arbitration Case No. 11-02245. The FINRA arbitration panel held that Grundstedt was entitled to an offset against the outstanding balance of the first promissory note dated July 30, 2008 because Wells Fargo, then Wachovia at the time, breached an implied contract and/or the covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the contracts Grundstedt signed, causing him substantial economic damage.

Wells Fargo claimed that Grundstedt failed to repay three separate forgivable promissory notes. Note 1 was in the principal amount of $320,000 and constituted a “transitional bonus” Grundstedt was rewarded with for moving his book of business from his former employer, Citigroup. Like the other notes in the litigation, the principal portion of Note 1 could be received in a lump sum or could be taken in monthly installments. In either case, the monthly re-payment of principal and interest was to be offset by the forgiveness of an equivalent amount conditioned upon Grundstedt’s continued employment with Wachovia’s.

According to the order, at the time Grundstedt accepted employment with Wachovia, he signed multiple agreements. One of these agreements promised Grundstedt that he would receive “support” from Wachovia including “re-assignment of accounts, walk-ins, prospective customer leads…” among other forms of company support. The panel found that Wachovia initially lived up to its promises but that the situation changed after Wachovia was acquired by Wells Fargo. In the fall of 2009, Wells Fargo consolidated operations, closed branches, and changed payouts and various other things designed with the intent to make the overall business more efficient and profitable.

James Busch of Wells Fargo Advisors Barred Over Allegations of Misappropriating $1.3 Million from Customers

January 6, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Broker James Arnold Busch (“Busch”) was barred from the broker industry by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) over allegations that Busch engaged in securities fraud by misappropriating customer funds from approximately 8 different clients’ bank accounts. FINRA alleged that most of Busch’s victims were elderly women.

In 1989, Busch first became registered with FINRA as a Series 6 (Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Limited Representative). In 1992, Busch became licensed as a Series 7 (General Securities Representative). In 2000, Busch became registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC (“Wells Fargo”) where Busch remained working out of various Georgia branch office locations until his termination in October 2013.

FINRA alleged that Busch worked in various branch offices of Wells Fargo that were also located in the firm’s affiliated bank. Many of Busch’s customers had both Wells Fargo brokerage accounts and Wells Fargo bank accounts. FINRA found that Busch had access to his customers’ bank account information through his relationship to the customers’ brokerage account. From 2006 to 2013, Busch used his customers’ bank account information to misappropriate approximately $1.3 million from approximately eight of his Wells Fargo brokerage customers. FINRA alleged that Busch took advantage of mostly elderly women.