Articles Tagged with Woodbury Financial Services

According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) financial Broker Ronald Hannes (Hannes), previously associated with Woodbury Financial Services, Inc., has at least one disclosable event. These events include one tax lien, alleging that Hannes recommended unsuitable investments in different investment products including debt securities among other allegations and complaints.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a final customer complaint on September 09, 2024.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (‘Commission’) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Ronald Walter Hannes (Respondent). In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement, which the Commission has determined to accept. The commission finds that on September 16, 2020, the State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions Securities Division entered a Consent Order (‘Washington Order’) in an administrative action entitled In the Matter of Determining Whether there has been a violation of the Securities Act of Washington by: Ronald Walter Hannes; Hannes Financial Services, Inc., Order No. S-20-2873-20-CO01. The Washington Order incorporated by reference the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in the Statement of Charges and Notice of Intent to Enter Order to Cease and Desist, Deny Future Registrations, Impose Fines, and Charge Costs, Order Number S-20-2873-20-SC01 (‘Statement of Charges’). The Statement of Charges found that, among other things, Hannes violated RCW 21.20.010, the anti-fraud section of the Securities Act of Washington, and engaged in dishonest and unethical business practices in violation of WAC 460-22B-090. Without admitting or denying the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in the Statement of Charges, Hannes consented to the entry of the Washington Order, which ordered, inter alia, Hannes to cease and desist from violating RCW 21.20.010, and further ordered that any application for registration as an investment adviser, investment adviser representative, broker-dealer, or securities salesperson by Hannes shall be denied. The Statement of Charges incorporated by reference into the Washington Order found that ‘[f]rom approximately 2003 to 2019, Hannes engaged in an extensive, long-term fraud against his  . . . Clients by convincing them to write checks to [Hannes Financial Services, Inc.] for off-the-books investments, then using the money for unknown purposes.’ The Statement of Charges also found that Hannes ‘defrauded at least nineteen clients, with total losses exceeding $2.9 million’ and appears to have falsified checks during an internal investigation conducted by the dually-registered broker-dealer and investment adviser with which Hannes was associated at the time. On July 18, 2023, Hannes pled guilty to one count of ‘Investment Advisor Fraud’ in violation of Title 15 United States Code, Sections 80b-6, 80b-17 before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, in United States v. Ronald Walter Hannes, Case No. 2:22-CR-0085-TOR. On February 22, 2024, a judgment in the criminal case was entered against Hannes. He was sentenced to probation for a term of five years and ordered to pay $3,187,545.15 in restitution and a $100 assessment. In his signed Plea Agreement, Hannes stipulated and agreed that the facts set forth in the ‘Factual Basis and Statement of Facts’ are accurate. These facts include, inter alia, that Hannes persuaded victims ‘to invest in separate ‘high rate, tax-free’ bond investments,’ and convinced victims to write checks to Hannes Financial Services, Inc., and other entities at Hannes’s request, to invest in the bonds, but ‘there were no bonds or securities attached to these investments.’

Previously financial advisor Brian Marston (Marston), previously employed by brokerage firm Woodbury Financial Services, Inc. has been subject to at least 2 disclosable events. These events include 2 customer complaints. According to a BrokerCheck reports most of the recent customer complaints concern either corporate debt securities or alternative investments such as direct participation products (DPPs) like business development companies (BDCs), non-traded real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil & gas programs, annuities, and private placements.  The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP have represented hundreds of investors who suffered losses caused by these types of high risk, low reward products.

FINRA BrokerCheck shows a pending customer complaint with a damage request of $37,000.00 on November 21, 2023.

Claimant alleges misrepresentation and unsuitable recommendations with regard to the sale of an alternative investment.

shutterstock_128655458-300x200The attorneys at Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating BrokerCheck records reports that Daryl Tomobu Serizawa, currently employed by Woodbury Financial Services, Inc., has been subject to at least three customer complaints during his career. According to records kept by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Serizawa’s customer complaints allege that Serizawa engaged in excessive trading, made investments that were not in the client’s best interests, and inappropriately sold private investment funds.

In December 2019, a customer complained that Serizawa violated the securities laws by alleging that Serizawa inappropriately sold private investment funds. The claim settled in the amount of $335,875.45.

In March 2005, a customer complained that Serizawa violated the securities laws by alleging that Serizawa took advantage of the customer in making purchases and sales that were not always in their best interest. Rather, it is claimed that these transactions were done specifically to generate commissions. This claim alleged $119,754.88 in damages and was denied.

In March 2004, a customer complained that Serizawa violated the securities laws by alleging that Serizawa engaged in excessive trading. The claim settled in the amount of $22,000.

Continue Reading

shutterstock_73854277-300x200The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently investigating claims that advisor James Kennedy (Kennedy) has been accused by a financial regulator of engaging in unapproved business activities among other allegations.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Kennedy was employed by his prior employer Woodbury Financial Services, Inc. (Woodbury Financial) prior to being investigated concerning his activities.  If you have been a victim of Kennedy’s alleged misconduct our firm may be able to assist you in recovering funds.

In April 2020, FINRA brought a regulatory action and fount that Kennedy consented to sanctions and findings that he failed to provide documents and information requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation into a tip received. FINRA found that Kennedy provided partial but incomplete responses to FINRA’s requests and then subsequently ceased cooperating with the investigation.  FINRA also determined that Kennedy’s former firm filed a Form U5 disclosing his termination and explaining that he was permitted to resign for engaging in an unapproved outside business activity involving a financial transaction with a couple of clients.

Kennedy’s disclosed outside business disclosures include being an insurance agent, Kennedy Investment Consultants LLC, and Hoy Road Properties.  It is unclear whether or not the allegations involve any of these disclosed entities.

Continue Reading

shutterstock_135103109-300x200According to BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) advisor Daniel Flores (Flores), formerly associated with Woodbury Financial Services, Inc. (Woodbury Financial) in Appleton, Wisconsin was terminated by his firm concerning allegations that Flores engaged in an unapproved financial transaction with a client.  Thereafter in May 2018  a customer filed a complaint alleging that that Flores engaged in unauthorized and excessive trading.  The claim is currently pending.  In July 2018 FINRA sought documents and information from Flores which he refused to provide.  Accordingly, Flores was barred from the industry for failing to respond to FINRA’s requests.

At this time, the claims against Flores are unclear as to the exact nature and extent of the activity.  Flores has outside business disclosures including New Heights Insurance Services and Fox River Valley.

Continue Reading

shutterstock_187532306-300x200According to BrokerCheck records financial advisor Robert Hoffmann (Hoffmann), formerly associated with Thurston, Springer, Miller, Herd & Titak, Inc. (Thurston, Springer), has been subject to two customer complaints, one regulatory action, and one tax lien.  According to records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in January 2017 a customer filed a complaint alleging that Hoffmann made unsuitable investments, unauthorized trading, and churning among other claims.  The claim seeks $3,200,000 in damages and is currently pending.

In September 2017, FINRA sanctioned Hoffmann stated that Hoffmann consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he willfully failed to amend his Form U4 to timely disclose an unsatisfied Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax lien filed against him.  In addition, there is one tax lien disclosed on Hoffmann’s report for $106,991 filed in December 2014.  Tax liens and judgements are material information for an investor to consider for several reasons.  A broker with large unpaid debts may be tempted to recommend high commission products and services to satisfy their personal debts.  In addition, a broker’s inability to manage their own finances is material in a customer’s decision to retain the advisor’s services.

Brokers have a responsibility treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client.  In order to make a suitable recommendation the broker must meet certain requirements.  First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation and due diligence into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors.  Second, the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives such as the client’s retirement status, long or short term goals, age, disability, income needs, or any other relevant factor.

shutterstock_177792281-300x198Our law firm, Gana Weinstein LLP, is investigating claims made by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Dan Droeg (Droeg). According to BrokerCheck, Droeg’s record contains two customer complaints filed against him regarding alleged unsuitability.

The most recent customer complaint was filed against Droeg in November 2016. During the period of July 2012 to November 2016, Droeg allegedly recommended over-concentrated and illiquid investments in variable annuities for numerous profit sharing plans. The client also claimed that the broker allegedly incorrectly reported the values and performances of the investments. The alleged damages are worth $250,067. The case is currently pending.

During January 2005, another customer complaint was filed against Droeg concerned alleged unsuitability. The broker allegedly recommended variable annuities, which were highly unsuitable for an elderly customer with low risk tolerance. The alleged damages were worth $6,000 and the case settled for $18,043.79.

shutterstock_172154582-300x197The securities fraud lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints concerning alleged misrepresentation and an employment separation filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) against broker Elaine Marie Zito (Zito). According to BrokerCheck records, Zito has been in the securities industry since 1997 and is currently working for Newbridge Securities Corporation (Newbridge) in Scottsdale, Arizona.

The most recent customer complaint against Zito was filed in April 2017 alleging that she misrepresented the client’s account regarding the purchase of a variable annuity back in 2006. Zito was employed at Woodbury Financial Services, Inc during the alleged misrepresentation. The case is currently pending.

During November 2016, Zito was discharged from Questar Capital Corporation (Questar) for allegedly violating the firm’s rules and regulations in relation to unauthorized use of discretion of mutual funds.

shutterstock_123758422-300x200Our securities fraud attorneys are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against Barry Rumpel (Rumpel) currently associated with IFS Securities alleging unsuitable investments among other claims.  The majority of the complaints involve variable universal life insurance policies (VULs).  According to brokercheck records Rumpel has been subject to four customer complaints, one employment separation for cause, and one criminal matter.

In May 2016 Woodbury Financial Services, Inc. (Woodbury Financial) alleged that Rumpel engaged in a personal financial transaction with a client and terminated Rumpel.  The most recent customer complaint was filed in October 2016 and alleged that a VUL sold to the customer and his wife were not suitable and that wrong net worth was entered in application in 2011 and 2012.  The claim was dismissed.

VULs are often unsuitable life insurance products for many investors due to their high costs compared to traditional life insurance policies.  VULs can also lapse if policy premiums are not paid resulting in a complete loss of the investors capital without any life insurance benefit.

shutterstock_159036452The securities lawyers of Gana Weinstein LLP are investigating customer complaints filed with The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) against broker Daniel Dunn (Dunn).  According to BrokerCheck records Dunn has been subject to at least five customer complaints.  The customer complaints against Dunn allege securities law violations that including unsuitable investments, and misrepresentations among other claims.   Many of the complaints involve direct participation products (DPPs) and private placements including ICON Leasing, variable annuities, and tenant-in-common trusts (TICs).

Our firm has represented many clients in these types of products.  All of these investments come with high costs and historically have underperformed even safe benchmarks, like U.S. treasury bonds.  For example, products like variable annuities, ICON, and other DPPs are only appropriate for a narrow band of investors under certain conditions due to the high costs, illiquidity, and huge redemption charges of the products, if they can be redeemed.  However, due to the high commissions brokers earn on these products they sell them to investors who cannot profit from them.  Further, investor often fail to understand that they have lost money until many years after agreeing to the investment.  In sum, for all of their costs and risks, investors in these programs are in no way additionally compensated for the loss of liquidity, risks, or cost.

Brokers have a responsibility treat investors fairly which includes obligations such as making only suitable investments for the client.  In order to make a suitable recommendation the broker must meet certain requirements.  First, there must be reasonable basis for the recommendation the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation and due diligence into the investment’s properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors.  Second, the broker then must match the investment as being appropriate for the customer’s specific investment needs and objectives such as the client’s retirement status, long or short term goals, age, disability, income needs, or any other relevant factor.

Contact Information
Please enter your namePlease enter your valid emailPlease enter your phone
Powered by
logo image
Dark mode

Liveadmins