William King’s FINRA Sanction: A Closer Look

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) has suspended former Merrill Lynch broker William King (CRD No. 1432593) for 30 days and assessed a $5,000 monetary fine. According to FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent No. 222077401201, between January 6, 2021, and January 5, 2023, William King exercised discretion over 204 trades across the accounts of four Merrill Lynch customers without prior written authorization. This conduct violated FINRA Rule 3260(b), which prohibits discretionary trading without explicit client consent, and Rule 2010, which mandates high standards of commercial honor.

FINRA and Mr. King entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent on March 3, 2025.

Unauthorized trading often occurs in non-discretionary accounts, where a customer retains discretion. In non-discretionary accounts, brokers must obtain a customer’s permission every time before placing a trade.

Unauthorized trading is an unethical and illegal practice. It is also a violation of securities rules and regulations and can cause enormous harm to customers.

Merrill Lynch terminated Mr. King in April 2026 following allegations of unsuitable and unauthorized trading. This came after he managed a reported $1.4 billion in client assets, raising questions about the firm’s oversight of such a high-profile broker.

A Troubling Pattern: Analyzing King’s Customer Disputes

A review of King’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reveals a staggering 29 customer disputes over his 30-year career, with 24 filed since 2022 alone. This surge in complaints coincides with his final years at Merrill Lynch and paints a troubling picture of systemic issues. Let’s break down the disputes and their outcomes:

• Total Disputes: Mr. King has been the subject of 29 customer complaints, with 24 initiated between 2022 and March 2025 (current date). These recent cases likely stem from the same period of unauthorized and unsuitable trading flagged by Merrill Lynch and FINRA.
• Settled Cases: 13 of the customer disputes have resulted in monetary settlements.
• Pending Cases: 1 dispute remains pending, where a customer has alleged an unsuitable investment strategy, unauthorized trading, misrepresentation, omission of material facts, and that the Financial Advisor was not acting in their best interest in 2020.
• Denied/Closed Without Action: 10 cases were denied or closed, often with no payout. Most of these complaints were direct written and verbal complaints made to Merrill Lynch, and no legal action was taken. These individuals may still be able to pursue recovery and should consult with an attorney.

Analysis of Settlements vs. Damages: In the settled cases with disclosed amounts, investors recovered an average of 28% to 30% of their requested damages. For example, the following settlements have been disclosed:

• • May 2023: Claimed damages of $300,000; settled for $85,000 (28% of requested).
  • August 2022: Claimed damages of $500,000; settled for $150,000 (30% of requested).
  • October 2022: Claimed damages of $1,000,000; settled for $275,000 (27.5% of requested).

What Went Wrong? The Role of Brokerage Oversight

King’s case raises red flags about Merrill Lynch’s supervision. How could a broker with a $1.4 billion book engage in 204 unauthorized trades across multiple accounts without detection? FINRA Rule 3110 requires firms to establish robust supervisory systems, yet King’s actions slipped through the cracks for two years. His resignation—framed as “voluntary” but tied to serious allegations—further suggests a pattern of firms distancing themselves from liability rather than addressing root causes.

The sheer volume of customer disputes since 2022 (24 in three years) is extraordinary, even for a seasoned broker. Compare this to the industry average: studies suggest only about 7-8% of brokers have misconduct disclosures over their careers. King’s record far exceeds this, signaling a chronic issue that Merrill Lynch arguably failed to curb.

Investor Takeaways: Protecting Your Portfolio

King’s case is a wake-up call for investors. Here’s how you can safeguard your financial future:

1. Vet Your Broker: Use FINRA’s BrokerCheck to review a broker’s history. King’s 29 disputes were public knowledge—red flags that savvy investors could have spotted.
2. Monitor Your Accounts: Unauthorized trading, like King’s 204 trades, often goes unnoticed without regular scrutiny. Demand written authorization for discretionary actions.
3. Know Your Rights: If you suspect misconduct, FINRA arbitration can recover losses from brokers and firms. Claims may include negligent supervision against firms like Merrill Lynch for failing to oversee their advisors.
4. Seek Legal Help: A securities arbitration attorney can analyze your case, quantify losses, and pursue maximum recovery—especially when settlements fall short, as seen in King’s disputes.

Holding Firms Accountable

Merrill Lynch’s role cannot be overlooked. Firms have a legal duty to supervise brokers and protect clients from harm. When they falter, investors can pursue claims for damages caused by inadequate oversight. King’s $5,000 fine and 30-day suspension may deter individual misconduct, but they do little to address systemic failures or compensate victims. Arbitration offers a path to hold both brokers and firms accountable, potentially yielding awards far exceeding FINRA’s sanctions.

Act Now: Don’t Let Misconduct Cost You

William King’s story—of unauthorized trades, a flood of customer disputes, and a quiet exit from Merrill Lynch—illustrates the risks of unchecked broker behavior. If you’ve worked with King or another advisor whose actions mirror this pattern, you may have a claim. At Iorio Law PLLC, we specialize in FINRA arbitration, fighting for investors against firms like Merrill Lynch. With 24 of King’s disputes arising since 2022 and settlements averaging just 28-30% of claimed damages, the need for skilled representation is clear.

Contact us today for a free consultation. Visit our website or call (646) 330-4624 to discuss how we can help you recover losses from broker misconduct. Don’t let your investments become another statistic—let us fight for the justice you deserve.

Case Background: A Risky Bet Gone Wrong

The claimants filed their initial Statement of Claim on February 22, 2021, accusing UBS and Burish of breach of fiduciary duty, violation of FINRA suitability rules, negligent supervision, and fraud. The allegations centered on a high-stakes trading strategy that involved shorting Tesla stock—a speculative move designed for short-term gains rather than the long-term wealth preservation the claimants sought. According to the amended claim, UBS and Burish pushed this aggressive approach, provided boilerplate paperwork to unsophisticated investors, and encouraged holding these risky positions despite ballooning losses.

Tesla’s stock, known for its volatility, soared in value during the period in question, turning the short positions into a financial disaster for the claimants. At the hearing, the claimants collectively sought over $36 million in actual damages, alongside punitive damages and legal costs. One couple alone requested $26,344,929.36, reflecting the scale of their losses.

UBS and Burish denied the allegations and sought dismissal of the case, expungement of Burish’s CRD records, and reimbursement of costs. However, the three-person arbitration panel sided overwhelmingly with the claimants.

The Award: A Massive Win for Investors

After a grueling process that included nine pre-hearing sessions and 71 hearing sessions spanning May 2023 to December 2024, the panel issued its award on February 27, 2025. The breakdown is jaw-dropping:

• Compensatory Damages: UBS was ordered to pay $17,033,359.50 to Claimants A & B, $792,871.20 to Claimants C & D, $269,064.00 to Claimants E &F, $801,216.00 to Claimants G & H, and $4,163,011.20 to Claimant I. Burish was also held jointly liable, contributing $1,892,595.50, $88,096.80, $29,896.00, $89,024.00, and $462,556.80 to the respective claimants.
• Punitive Damages: UBS faced a punitive damages bill totaling over $69 million, including $51,100,078.50 to Claimants A & B, with additional awards ranging from $807,192.00 to $12,489,033.60 for the other claimants. Burish was assessed $100,000 in punitive damages per claimant group, totaling $500,000. These awards were grounded in Iowa law, citing willful and reckless misconduct.
• Expungement Denied: Burish’s request to clear Occurrence Numbers 2108362 and 2116466 from his CRD records was rejected, ensuring the case remains on his regulatory record.

The total award—$92,178,409.50—sends a clear message: brokerage firms and their advisors can face severe consequences for pushing unsuitable investments.

Why This Matters: Lessons from the Tesla Short Debacle

This case, as reported by AdvisorHub (e.g., “UBS Ordered to Pay $92 Million Over Top Wisconsin Broker’s Big Tesla Short”), highlights critical issues in the financial industry:

1. Unsuitability Violations: FINRA Rule 2111 requires brokers to recommend investments aligned with a client’s risk tolerance and goals. Shorting Tesla—a notoriously volatile stock—was a misfit for investors seeking asset protection and multi-generational wealth transfer.
2. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: UBS and Burish failed to act in their clients’ best interests, prioritizing aggressive strategies over prudence.
3. Supervisory Failures: UBS’s liability reflects a lack of oversight, allowing Burish to pursue a high-risk approach unchecked.
4. Punitive Damages as Deterrence: The massive punitive award signals that egregious misconduct won’t be tolerated, aiming to deter similar behavior industry-wide.

Our Experience: Fighting for Investors

As a securities arbitration law firm, we have seen firsthand how FINRA arbitration can level the playing field for investors. Recently, we represented a retail investor in a FINRA arbitration, securing a $65,000 award against the former owner and control person of Integrity Brokerage Services over unsuitable GWG L Bonds. While smaller in scale, that victory mirrors the UBS case—both involved advisors recommending risky investments that devastated their clients. At Iorio Law PLLC, we specialize in holding firms like UBS accountable, and cases like these reinforce why our work matters.

What This Means for Investors

The $92 million UBS award is a beacon of hope for investors harmed by broker misconduct. Whether you’ve lost money on Tesla shorts, GWG L Bonds, or other unsuitable investments, FINRA arbitration offers a path to recovery. The arbitration process is designed to deliver binding, enforceable decisions. With punitive damages on the table, it also punishes bad actors and compensates victims beyond their direct losses.

If you suspect your broker or firm mismanaged your investments, time is critical—statutes of limitations apply. Contact an experienced securities arbitration attorney to evaluate your case. The UBS ruling proves that even the biggest firms aren’t immune to accountability.

Conclusion

The FINRA award in Arbitration No. 21-00488 is a watershed moment for investor rights. UBS and Andrew Burish’s $92 million penalty reflects the severe consequences of pushing unsuitable, high-risk strategies like Tesla shorts on unsuspecting clients. For us, it’s a reminder of why we fight for investors—whether it’s a $65,000 win against a small firm or a headline-making victory against a giant like UBS. If you’ve suffered losses due to broker misconduct, don’t hesitate to reach out to Iorio Law PLLC. We’re here to help you reclaim what’s yours.

About Iorio Law PLLC

Iorio Law PLLC is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have 15 years of experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover nearly $100 million of investment losses in over 700 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you have suffered investment losses as a result of broker misconduct or negligence, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio at info@iorio.law. Alternatively, call the firm toll-free at (646) 330-4624.

• The GWG Wind Down Trust has sold two of its three tangible assets for a total of approximately $10.58 million.
• The sale of its life insurance policy portfolio generated $10 million in cash.
• The sale of shares in FOXO stock generated $586,942.
• The GWG Wind Down Trust settled a dispute with Fifth Season Investments, LLC for $8 million. Thus far, the Trust has paid $1,848,738 in cash to Fifth Season, still owing $6,151,262. The GWG Wind Down Trust previously set aside a reserve of 20 million shares of BENF. Those shares currently have a book value of $5.12 million. Accordingly, there is currently a $1 million shortfall, which the GWG Wind Down Trust will need to pay out of its cash holdings, presumably diminishing the cash it received from the sale of two of its three tangible assets.
• The $10.5 million in cash proceeds represents approximately .0065% of the 1,618,517,956 in Series A1 (formerly L Bonds) WDT Interests.
• The third tangible asset owned by the GWG Wind Down Trust is 169,701,487 shares of Beneficient (NASDAQ:BENF).
• The Beneficient share price has dropped significantly since going public at $15 per share. On June 20, 2023, the share price closed at $4.57. By August 1, 2023, the share price closed at $2.00. On February 15, 2024, the share price closed at $0.2561.
• The GWG Wind Down Trust is finding it difficult to sell its shares in Beneficient. There appears to be little to no interest on behalf of investors in purchasing shares of BENF, with shares trading in a very thinly traded market.

We believe that there is no obvious or foreseeable path to monetization for the GWG Wind Down Trust. Beneficient has made the following disclosures since August 2023:

• On June 29, 2023, Beneficient received a “Wells Notice” from the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, stating that the SEC has made a preliminary determination to recommend that the SEC file a civil enforcement action against the company alleging violations of certain provisions of the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act relating to the Company’s association with GWG Holdings. In addition, the company’s Founder, CEO, and Chairman, Brad Heppner, also received Wells Notices related to the investigation of GWG Holdings.
• Beneficient sustained an operating loss of $2.45 billion between April 1, 2023, and December 31, 2023.
• As of December 31, 2023, Beneficient only had $11.2 million in unrestricted cash. In mid-2023, Beneficient disclosed that it would meet its ongoing obligations by furloughing and potentially laying off employees.
• As of December 31, 2023, Beneficient’s assets were approximately $500 million, down from $2.9 billion as of 3/31/2023, driven by a goodwill impairment of $2.28 billion.

The only other asset owned by the Wind Down Trust is a beneficial interest in the GWG Litigation Trust. However, the Litigation Trust is only in an information-gathering phase.

When Can GWG L Bond Investors Expect to Receive a Payment (Distribution) from the GWG Wind Down Trust?

The GWG Wind Down Trust has not determined when a distribution will be paid. Distributions can only be paid upon receipt of sufficient cash proceeds from the assets to be able to make a distribution. The sale of the life insurance portfolio and FOXO shares, which generated only $10.5 million in cash, is below the minimal threshold needed for the GWG Wind Down Trust to make a distribution.

The GWG Wind Down Trust has only two more ways to generate cash: (1) the sale of its stock in Beneficient and (2) receiving proceeds from the GWG Litigation Trust. Whether the GWG Wind Down Trust will be able to monetize these two assets remains unknown, and some believe it is doubtful.

However, that has not appeared to stop some brokers from still telling investors that they will receive most or all of their invested capital back. We believe that these assurances are not only false but irresponsible. The GWG Litigation Trustee recently published a letter to GWG Investors where he addressed these unsupported assurances:

Over the past few months, numerous investors have reached out to me inquiring when they will receive their money back because their brokers have assured them they will receive all their money back. To be completely candid, I simply don’t understand how anyone can make any such assurances at this point in time.

To that end, I strongly encourage all GWG investors to consult their own independent counsel to discuss any potential claims they may have against any third parties who may have recommended this investment to them.

To put it simply, no one knows when or if the GWG Wind Down Trust will be able to make any distributions, but the outlook gets bleaker with every update.

How Else Can GWG L Bond Investors Recover Their Investment Losses?

Many GWG L Bond investors have retained securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP to file FINRA arbitration claims against brokerage firms that sold these speculative, high-risk, and illiquid financial products to recover their investment losses. These claims are separate and in addition to the liquidation of GWG through the GWG Wind Down Trust.

We continue to believe that GWG L Bonds investors’ best avenue for potential recovery of losses is to file a separate FINRA arbitration claim against their brokerage firms. Iorio Altamirano LLP has already helped GWG L Bond investors recover nearly $2 million in losses.

If you would like more information about how to file a claim, please respond to this email to schedule a free and confidential consultation.

To read more about our investigation into the sale of GWG L Bonds to retail investors and to watch videos of our GWG Panel Discussions, please visit our investigation page: www.gwglawyer.com

About Iorio Altamirano LLP

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have over 20 years of combined experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover investment losses in over 1,000 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you have invested in L Bonds offered by GWG Holdings, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio at august@ia-law.com or Jorge Altamirano at jorge@ia-law.com. Alternatively, call the firm toll-free at (646) 330-4624.

When disputes arise between investors and brokerage firms, they are usually resolved through arbitration. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) offers a streamlined and cost-effective dispute resolution forum for resolving disputes in the securities industry. In this blog post, we’ll take a deep dive into FINRA arbitration, its key features, benefits, and what you should know if you find yourself involved in a securities-related dispute.

Understanding FINRA Arbitration

What is FINRA?

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is a self-regulatory organization authorized by the United States Congress to oversee and regulate the securities industry. One of FINRA’s essential functions is to provide a forum for resolving disputes between investors, brokerage firms, and individual brokers.

Arbitration vs. Lawsuits: The Key Differences

Unlike traditional litigation, where disputes are resolved through the court system, FINRA arbitration is a private, alternative dispute resolution process. There are several key differences:

1. • Speed and Efficiency: FINRA arbitration typically resolves disputes more quickly than litigation, which can drag on for years. Arbitration cases often conclude within 12-18 months, allowing parties to move on with their lives and investments more quickly.
   • Cost-Effective: Litigation can be expensive due to legal fees, court costs, and other expenses. In contrast, FINRA arbitration tends to be more cost-effective, as it has lower filing fees and streamlined procedures.
   • Less Burdensome Discovery: Discovery is the exchange of relevant documents and information. In a lawsuit, discovery consists of depositions, interrogatories, and the exchange of documents. In FINRA arbitrations, depositions and interrogatories are generally not allowed. As a result, the discovery process is more streamlined, less burdensome, and less costly.
   • Confidentiality: FINRA arbitration proceedings are generally confidential, whereas court proceedings are a matter of public record.

Who Can Initiate FINRA Arbitration?

Parties who can initiate FINRA arbitration include investors, brokerage firms, and individual brokers. Many arbitrations arise over investment losses. Investors often file arbitration claims against their brokerage firms when the firm or its agent broker recommends investments that are not suitable and in the best interest of the investor. Investors also file arbitration claims when their brokers misrepresent or omit material information at the time of the recommendation. Common claims brought by investors include unsuitability, violation of Regulation Best Interest (RegBI), misrepresentation or omission of material information, unauthorized trading, churning, breach of fiduciary duty, and financial elder abuse.

The FINRA Arbitration Process

1. Filing a Claim – The process begins with the filing of a Statement of Claim by the aggrieved party. The respondent (the party against whom the claim is filed) is then given the opportunity to respond
2. Arbitrator Selection – The parties select arbitrators from FINRA’s roster of arbitrators using a strike and rank system. The number of arbitrators that serve on an arbitration panel varies depending on the size of the complaint.
3. Discovery – The exchange of relevant documents and information.
4. Hearing – A hearing is held where both parties present their cases, including evidence and witnesses. The arbitrators evaluate the evidence and arguments presented.
5. Award – The arbitrators deliberate and issue a written decision. This decision is final and binding. Parties are generally required to abide by the decision, and there is limited scope for appeal.

Settlement

At any time during the arbitration process, the parties can resolve their dispute by entering into a settlement. Approximately 69 – 70% of all FINRA arbitrations are resolved through settlement instead of a hearing.

Conclusion

Investors who have suffered investment losses should be aware of their rights to pursue arbitration when disputes arise. Legal representation is often advisable to navigate the complexities of the process effectively.

Investors involved in a securities-related dispute are encouraged to consult with attorneys who have vast experience in FINRA arbitration to help them navigate the process and ensure that their rights and interests are protected throughout the proceedings.

About Iorio Altamirano LLP

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have over 20 years of combined experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover investment losses in over 1,000 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you have suffered investment losses, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio at august@ia-law.com or Jorge Altamirano at jorge@ia-law.com. Alternatively, call the firm toll-free at (646) 330-4624.

In a separate action, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York filed criminal charges against Mr. Perera. He was arrested on Monday, March 27, 2023, and arraigned on a 16-count indictment charging him with securities fraud, investment advisor fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering, in connection with a scheme to induce an investor to purchase stock in companies that traded on the NASDAQ and New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).

Customers of Mr. Perera or Aegis Capital Corp. who have suffered financial losses as a result of Mr. Perera’s negligence or misconduct can contact New York securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential consultation and review of their legal rights.

Iorio Altamirano LLP represents investors that have disputes with their financial advisors or brokerage firms, such as Aegis Capital Corp.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Surage Kamal Roshan Perera and Janues Capital Incorporated, 2:23-cv-02316

On March 27, 2023, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filed a lawsuit in federal court against Mr. Perera and his firm, Janues Capital Incorporated (“Janues”), alleging that from February 2022 until March 2023, Mr. Perera defrauded at least one investor (“Investor A”) out of millions of dollars by lying about investment opportunities and strategies; misappropriating the investor’s money by, in part, not purchasing the securities she subscribed to through Janues and using a substantial portion of her money to engage in high volume, highly leveraged trading in other securities; lying to her about non-existent investment profits; and concealing large trading losses.

According to the complaint, Mr. Perera falsely told Investor A that his firm had access to specific restricted securities at discounted prices through connections with large institutional investors. Investor A first met Mr. Perera through a mutual friend when Mr. Perera was a registered broker of Aegis Capital Corp.

Mr. Perera also allegedly claimed to exercise a trading strategy—which he called “options straddles”—that would not only prevent any trading losses but also, for some of the supposed investments, guarantee returns on the investment of at least 9% and up to as much as 50%. Perera’s false promises convinced the investor to give him approximately $4.3 million.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Perera did not use Investor A’s funds to purchase the securities she had subscribed to and did not engage in the promised “options straddles” to prevent trading losses and generate the profits he had guaranteed. Instead, he transferred at least $3.5 million of Investor A’s funds to a brokerage account in the name of his wife, Nishani Alahakoon, and used those funds to engage in highly speculative, leveraged trading, which resulted in over $3 million in trading losses.

Mr. Perera allegedly concealed his misappropriation of Investor A’s funds and his trading losses by providing Investor A with phony trade confirmations and account statements that falsely showed the expected returns and by using funds received from other sources to partially repay the investor victim.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Mr. Perera and Janues violated antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. Mr. Perera also was charged with aiding and abetting Janues’ alleged violations. The SEC’s complaint names Nishani Alahakoon, whose brokerage account Perera and Janues traded, as a relief defendant.

Financial Advisor Surage Kamal Roshan Perera (CRD No. 4716321)

Roshan Perera had 18 years of experience in the securities industry and was associated with 11 different brokerage firms, including five different firms that have been expelled from the securities industry by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). Mr. Perera was registered with Aegis Capital Corp from April 18, 2018, through September 12, 2018.

According to his public disclosure report with FINRA, Mr. Perera has been the subject of at least one customer dispute, which included allegations of unauthorized trading. The 2009 dispute was settled.

Investors who have disputes with their financial advisors and brokerage firms can file securities arbitration claims to resolve the disputes and seek recovery of investment losses.

FINRA’s BrokerCheck tool can be used to obtain Mr. Perera’s complete and updated disclosure report.

Aegis Capital Corp. – A Duty to Supervise

Selling away is when a financial advisor solicits a customer to participate in a private securities transaction that is “away” from the firm. In other words, when a broker recommends a transaction to buy or sell a security that is not offered or approved by the brokerage firm where the financial advisor is employed or registered.

A brokerage firm can be held responsible for its financial advisors’ conduct in “selling away” cases under certain circumstances.

Pursuant to FINRA Rule 3280, when a broker-dealer approves a private transaction away from the firm, the firm assumes legal responsibility for the trade. There are no exceptions to this rule. Broker-dealers can be held responsible for the conduct of their financial advisors in connection with these approved transactions.

Even if a transaction is not approved by a firm, a brokerage firm can also be held liable if the financial advisor acted with apparent authority or the investor reasonably believed that the advisor’s activities were approved or part of the broker’s services.

Brokerage firms like Aegis Capital Corp. must properly supervise financial advisors and customer accounts. Brokerage firms must also establish and maintain a reasonably designed system to oversee account activity, such as private securities transactions, to ensure compliance with securities laws and industry regulations. When a brokerage firm fails to supervise its financial advisors or the investment account activity sufficiently, it may be liable for investment losses sustained by customers.

See Also:

Law Firm Investigating the Sale of GWG L Bonds to Retail Investors by Aegis Capital Corp

Iorio Altamirano LLP Files GPB Automotive Claim Against Aegis Capital Corp

Aegis Capital Corp. Ordered to Pay Nearly $2.7 Million for Supervisory Failures Related to Rampant Excessive and Unsuitable Trading

How to Recover Financial Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

If you have suffered investment losses with Mr. Perera or Aegis Capital Corp or suspect other inappropriate activity occurred in your investment or retirement account, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential review of your legal rights.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. Iorio Altamirano LLP pursues FINRA claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses arising out of wrongful conduct by stockbrokers and brokerage firms.

Even though the portfolio of life insurance policies does not directly secure the GWG L Bonds, this development is significant for GWG L Bond investors because GWG Holdings Inc.’s largest tangible asset is its portfolio of life insurance policies. It is believed that the value of these tangible assets will significantly impact the outcome of GWG Holdings Inc.’s restructuring effort through its filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

As of the bankruptcy filing on April 20, 2022, GWG Holdings, Inc. had over $1.6 billion in outstanding GWG L Bond obligations, mainly owed to retail investors.

GWG L Bond investors are worried about the $1 billion shortfall between the amount of principal owed to bondholders and the potential amount that GWG Holdings may be able to recover through the sale of its only tangible assets.

Iorio Altamirano LLP, a law firm that represents retail investors, is representing many GWG L Bond investors against brokerage firms across the country to recover investment losses and damages sustained by those firms’ recommendations to invest in GWG L Bonds. Based on the law firm’s investigation, there appears to have been widespread negligence and misconduct by many brokers and broker-dealers across the country.

Investors who purchased GWG L Bonds through a financial advisor are encouraged to contact Iorio Altamirano LLP (www.gwglawyer.com) for a free and confidential consultation and to review their legal rights. We can review and analyze potential claims and advise individuals of their legal rights without obligation or cost.

About GWG L Bonds

An L bond is a financial product created by GWG Holdings, Inc. (GWGH). The L Bonds are speculative, high-risk, illiquid, and unrated alternative investment offerings.

Initially, GWG Holdings pooled money from bond investors to purchase life insurance policies on the secondary market, paid the policy premiums, and then collected the death benefit when the insured individual passed away. However, beginning in 2018, GWG Holdings used the investor capital to invest in a new business model, exposing the company to riskier alternative assets. Many GWG L Bond investors were utterly unaware that GWG materially reoriented its business model, which, in our view, made it a much bigger credit risk. Additionally, many GWG L bond investors were not told by their financial advisors that GWG used investor capital to pay out the high distributions owed to other GWG L Bond investors in a Ponzi-like scheme.

GWG Holdings, Inc., which stopped making interest and maturity payments to GWG L Bond investors in January 2022, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in April 2022.

Many GWG L Bond investors are skeptical that they will receive any significant portion of their principal back. Investment News has reported that one anonymous GWG L bond investor estimates that the GWG L Bonds may now be worth 20 to 30 cents on the dollar.

Broker-dealers and brokers are required to make investment recommendations that are suitable and in the best interest of their customers. Brokerage firms and financial advisors must also disclose all material facts and risks of a security when making a recommendation. Firms and brokers must also conduct reasonable due diligence on products they offer before recommending them to any clients. When a firm or advisor fails to meet these standards of conduct, they can be held liable for damages.

For the latest on Iorio Altamirano LLP’s investigation of GWG L Bonds, including a key event timeline, visit our firm’s investigation page: Iorio Altamirano LLP’s Investigation of GWG L Bonds.

See Also:

GWG L Bond Investor Recovers Losses After Filing a FINRA Arbitration Claim

Law Firm Investigating Dempsey Lord Smith, LLC for the Sale of GWG L Bonds and GPB Capital Funds

Law Firm Investigating National Securities Corporation for the Sale of GWG L Bonds and GPB Capital Funds

Certified Financial Planner Board Suspends Western International Securities Broker Patrick Egan After SEC Charges Related to Selling GWG L Bonds

Law Firm Investigating the Sale of GWG L Bonds to Retail Investors by Western International Securities, Inc.

New York Law Firm Investigating the Sale of GWG L Bonds to Retail Investors by Great Point Capital LLC

Law Firm Investigating the Sale of GWG L Bonds to Retail Investors by Aegis Capital Corp

GWG Holdings, Inc. to be Delisted from The Nasdaq Stock Market; Law Firm Investigates Legal Claims for GWG L Bond Investors

GWG L Bond Investors Seek Recourse After GWG Holdings, Inc. Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

About Iorio Altamirano LLP

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have nearly 20 years of combined experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover investment losses in over 1,000 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you have invested in L Bonds offered by GWG Holdings, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio at august@ia-law.com or Jorge Altamirano at jorge@ia-law.com. Alternatively, call the firm toll-free at (646) 330-4624.

New York securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP is investigating potential legal claims related to investments in L Bonds offered by GWG Holdings, Inc. (GWGH). To read about the investigation’s findings, including a crucial event timeline, please visit our website: www.gwglawyer.com.

GWG Holdings, Inc.’s bankruptcy filing revealed for the first time that the ongoing SEC investigation includes an examination of sales practices of the GWG L Bonds by the brokerage firms that sold the securities, including Emerson Equity and its network of regional broker-dealers. According to the bankruptcy filing, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission issued subpoenas and documents to individual brokerage firms selling GWG L Bonds. As of the bankruptcy filing, GWG Holdings, Inc.’ had over $1.62 billion in outstanding GWG L Bond obligations, mostly owed to retail investors.

See Also:

GWG L Bond Investors Seek Recourse After GWG Holdings, Inc. Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

GWG Holdings, Inc. Misses Deadline to File Its 2021 Annual Report with the SEC

GWG L Bond Investor Update: GWG Holdings, Inc. Officially Defaults on Its Obligations to L Bond Investors – February 14, 2022

Law Firm Iorio Altamirano LLP Investigating the Sale of GWG L Bonds by Tony Barouti of Emerson Equity LLC

Investors Worried After GWG Holdings Inc.’s “L Bonds” Missed Interest Payments on January 15, 2022

How to Recover Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

GWG L bond investors are encouraged to immediately contact Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential consultation and review their legal rights. Iorio Altamirano LLP represents numerous GWG L bond investors in filing lawsuits in the form of securities arbitration claims against firms such as Emerson Equity LLC and Centaurus Financial, Inc. for sales practice violations connected to the solicitation and sale of GWG L Bonds.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have nearly 20 years of combined experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover investment losses in over 1,000 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you or a loved one has invested in L Bonds offered by GWG Holdings, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio at august@ia-law.com or Jorge Altamirano at jorge@ia-law.com. Alternatively, call the firm toll-free at (646) 330-4624.

Mr. Buffett’s words of wisdom can also be applied to investment recommendations made by a financial advisor in a bull market. Almost everyone looks like a genius in a booming market, including financial advisors. However, when the stock market enters into a correction, or something even more dreadful, the real risks of an investment or investment strategy are exposed, often leaving a trail of investment losses in their wake.

Investors who have suffered investment losses due to unsuitable or misleading investment recommendations by brokers or brokerage firms should consult with a lawyer to review their legal rights.

Fresh off its historic arbitration award against Robinhood, New York securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP offers free and confidential consultations to investors who may have been financially harmed.

Who Should Consult a Lawyer?

Brokerage firms and financial advisors are required to have a customer’s best interest in mind when they make investment recommendations or offer investment advice. This obligation is mandated by the SEC.

Specifically, when a financial advisor makes an investment recommendation, it must be in the investor’s best interest and must not place the interest of the financial professional or brokerage firm ahead of the interests of the retail investor. This standard of care, which is commonly referred to as “Regulation Best Interest” or “Reg BI,” applies to recommendations to purchase securities, sell or hold securities, implement an investment strategy, or open a specific type of account.

Financial advisors must also be truthful and disclose all material facts and risks to the customer when making an investment recommendation. If the financial advisor omits or misrepresents material facts or risks, they could be liable for investment losses.

Investors who have suffered financial losses due to investment recommendations that were not in their best interest, or misleading investment advice, may be able to file a lawsuit, in the form of a FINRA arbitration, to recover losses.

About Iorio Altamirano LLP

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in New York, NY. We represent investors nationwide and vigorously pursue FINRA arbitration claims on behalf of investors to recover investment losses.

We have nearly 20 years of combined experience as securities arbitration lawyers and have helped investors recover investment losses in over 1,000 cases. Our firm will file a FINRA securities arbitration claim on your behalf on a contingency fee basis to try to recover your losses. If we do not obtain a recovery, you do not owe us a legal fee.

If you have suffered investment losses, contact securities arbitration lawyers August Iorio and Jorge Altamirano of Iorio Altamirano LLP at august@ia-law.com, jorge@ia-law.com, or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential consultation and review of your legal rights.

The sixteen customers experienced total losses of $814,509.

If you have suffered financial losses investing with Ross Barish or Joseph Stone Capital L.L.C., or suspect that Mr. Barish did not have your best interest in mind when recommending investments or making account transactions, contact New York securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential review of your account or annuity contract.

Iorio Altamirano LLP represents investors that have disputes with their financial advisors or brokerage firms, such as Joseph Stone Capital.

Joseph Stone Capital L.L.C.

According to a 2017 investigation by Reuters, out of all of the brokerage firms in the country, Joseph Stone Capital hired the second most brokers with a history of significant disclosures. In 2021, Iorio Altamirano LLP set out to update that analysis.

The investigation revealed that seventy-six percent (76%) of Joseph Stone Capital’s brokers and supervisors have significant red flag public disclosures. Significant red flag disclosures include:

• regulatory sanctions,
• terminations of employment after allegations of misconduct,
• customer disputes that result in an award or settlement, and
• prior association with a firm that FINRA has expelled.

You can read the full investigative report here: Investigative Report: Iorio Altamirano LLP Investigation into Joseph Stone Capital L.L.C. Reveals Troubling Pasts for Owners, Executives, and Brokers

Mr. Barish is one of the brokers who had serious incidents reported on his BrokerCheck report.

Financial Ross Adam Barish (CRD No. 3094364)

Mr. Barish has 22 years of experience in the securities industry and has been associated with seven broker-dealers. He averages just over three years at each stop. In February 2013, he was hired by Joseph Stone Capital.

Prior Associations

Mr. Barish has been affiliated with the following brokerage firms:

• Joseph Stone Capital L.L.C. in Mineola, New York, from February 2013 to the present.
• First Midwest Securities, Inc. in Garden City, New York, from October 2008 to February 2013.
• J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. in Westbury, New York, from February 2008 to October 2008.
• Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc. in Princeton, New Jersey, from September 2006 to February 2008.
• Broadwall Capital LLC in New York, New York, from September 2004 to September 2006.
• Ladenburg, Thalmann & Co, Inc. in New York, New York, from November 2002 to September 2004.
• Ladenburg Capital Management Inc. in Bethpage, New York, from January 2000 to November 2002.
• Sands Brothers & Col. in New York, New York, from March 1999 to January 2000.

SEC Investigation

The SEC’s complaint alleged that Mr. Barish defrauded sixteen retail customers by executing a high-cost, in-and-out pattern of trading that lost his customers over $800,000 while generating commissions and fees for him of more than $400,000. Although Mr. Barish told customers that he was an experienced broker, Mr. Barish did nothing more than buy stocks and sell them after a brief holding strategy. According to the complaint, his “strategy” amounted to a scheme to enrich himself while persuading customers that profits were just around the corner.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Mr. Barish’s conduct in relation to these sixteen customers, whose accounts were active during different periods of time between 2013 and July 2019, violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws in four respects:

• Mr. Barish had a duty to have a reasonable basis for recommendations that he made of his customers. In violation of this duty, Mr. Barish recommended to sixteen customers a high cost, in-and-out trading strategy without any reasonable basis to believe that these recommendations were suitable for anyone. The recommended trading strategy resulted in losses for the customers and ill-gotten gains for Mr. Barish. Mr. Barish knew or recklessly disregarded that his recommendations, for which he had no reasonable basis, were not suitable for anyone.
• Mr. Barish’s recommended trading strategy was unsuitable for his customers in light of those customers’ financial needs, investment objectives, and circumstances.
• Mr. Barish made material misrepresentations to and omitted material information from his customers. By making a recommendation to purchase or sell a security to a customer, Mr. Barish implicitly represented that he had a reasonable basis for that recommendation. As Mr. Barish failed to have a reasonable basis for his recommendations to the sixteen customers, these recommendations constituted misrepresentations because Mr. Barish knew that the excessive costs which accumulated from the frequency trading made even a minimal profit all but impossible.
• Mr. Barish engaged in unauthorized trading by placing trades in customer accounts without obtaining their authorization to do so.

As a result of these violations, Mr. Barish received more than $400,00 in commissions and fees. The sixteen customers experienced total losses of $814,509.

Customer Complaints

According to his BrokerCheck report, Mr. Barish has been the subject of two customer lawsuits, in the form of FINRA securities arbitrations, since 2017:

• Customer Dispute (April 2017): A customer filed a securities arbitration complaint alleging $48,000 in damages as a result of unsuitable investment recommendations, excessive trading, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract. The matter was settled by Joseph Stone Capital, LLC and Mr. Barish for monetary compensation.
• Customer Dispute (February 2017): A customer filed a securities arbitration complaint alleging $50,000 in damages as a result of unsuitable investment recommendations, churning, and excessive margin. The matter was settled by Joseph Stone Capital, LLC and Mr. Barish for monetary compensation.

Excessive trading occurs when a financial advisor makes many trades in a customer’s account, not to benefit the customer but to generate commissions for the broker.

Churning is a more egregious variation of excessive trading. Churning refers to a situation where the broker executed an excessive number of trades and did so with the intent to defraud or reckless disregard for the customer’s interest.

Excessive trading and churning are unethical and illegal practices in the securities industry. They are all also violations of securities rules and regulations and can cause enormous harm to customers.

Joseph Stone Capital – A Duty to Supervise

Financial institutions like Joseph Stone Capital must properly supervise financial advisors and customer accounts. Brokerage firms must establish and maintain a reasonably designed system to oversee account activity, such as excessive trading, to ensure compliance with securities laws and industry regulations. When a brokerage firm fails to supervise its financial advisors or the investment account activity sufficiently, it may be liable for investment losses sustained by customers.

How to Recover Financial Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

If you have suffered investment losses with Ross Barish or Joseph Stone Capital or suspect other inappropriate activity occurred in your investment or retirement account, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential review of your legal rights.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. Iorio Altamirano LLP pursues FINRA claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses arising out of wrongful conduct by stockbrokers and brokerage firms.

**Corrections and Clarifications: June 30, 2021**

• An earlier version of this blog post incorrectly stated that according to a 2017 investigation by Reuters, out of all of the brokerage firms in the country, Joseph Stone Capital hired the most brokers with a history of significant disclosures. According to a 2017 investigation by Reuters, out of all of the brokerage firms in the country, Joseph Stone Capital hired the second most brokers with a history of significant disclosures, not the most.

Can I Sue My Financial Advisor Over Losses?

Yes, you can sue your financial advisor or broker to recover investment losses if the broker did not have your best interest in mind when they made an investment recommendation or offered investment advice. You can also sue your financial advisor or broker if the financial advisor misrepresented or omitted material facts that an investor should have known about the security or investment strategy.

However, the dispute likely will not be litigated in a court of law. Instead, it will be contested in arbitration.

What is Securities Arbitration?

When an investor suffers investment losses due to misconduct by a financial advisor or broker-dealer, the investor can file a securities arbitration claim against their financial advisor and/or broker-dealer in an effort to be compensated. Arbitration, an alternative dispute resolution process, is the primary forum for resolving disputes between investors and brokerage firms because the client agreement, which the customer signs at account opening, contains a mandatory arbitration clause. To read more about securities arbitration, click here.

Securities arbitration is a unique and complex practice area. Investors should seek out experienced counsel who understands the FINRA forum and can navigate the arbitration process to effectively advocate on their behalf.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. We pursue individual FINRA arbitration claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses from brokerage firms’ wrongful conduct.

Can You Sue Someone for a Bad Investment?

The short answer is “yes” if your advisor did not act in your best interest connected with an investment-related recommendation.

When a broker-dealer makes an investment recommendation, or a registered investment adviser provides investment advice, the investor is entitled to a recommendation (from a broker-dealer) or advice (from an investment adviser) that is in the best interest of the investor, and that does not place the interest of the financial professional or financial institution ahead of the interests of the retail investors.

The “best interest” standard is not limited to “recommendations” to purchase a security. It also applies to recommendations to sell or hold a security. Additionally, it applies to recommendations to purchase, sell, or hold an investment strategy. Finally, the “best interest” standard also explicitly applies to recommendations of types of accounts, including brokerage accounts and investment advisory accounts.

What is Excessive Trading or Churning?

Excessive trading occurs when a financial advisor makes many trades in a customer’s account, not to benefit the customer, but to generate commissions for the broker.

Churning is a more egregious variation of excessive trading. Churning refers to a situation where the broker executed an excessive number of trades and did so with the intent to defraud or reckless disregard for the customer’s interest. Churning is an unethical and illegal practice. It is also a violation of securities rules and regulations and can cause enormous harm to customers.

Excessive trading and churning are unethical and illegal practices. They are also violations of securities rules and regulations and can cause enormous harm to customers.

How Do I Sue an Investment Firm?

Brokerage firms must properly supervise financial advisors and customer accounts. Brokerage firms must also establish and maintain a reasonably designed system to oversee account activity to ensure compliance with securities laws and industry regulations. When a brokerage firm fails to sufficiently supervise its financial advisors or the investment account activity, it may be liable for investment losses sustained by customers.

If you believe you have a claim, you should contact experienced securities arbitration attorneys at Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential consultation and review of your legal rights.

How Much Do Securities Arbitration Attorneys Charge?

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. We pursue individual FINRA arbitration claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses from brokerage firms’ wrongful conduct.

Iorio Altamirano LLP generally represents investors through a contingency fee arrangement, which means that if we do not obtain a recovery, we do not collect a fee*.

*We do not collect a fee unless we obtain a recovery via settlement or judgment. You may, however, be responsible for costs and expenses the firm has advanced according to the terms of your agreement with the firm. The firm may recover advanced costs and expenses by deducting the expense from the gross recovery of any settlement or judgment.

Original Post:

FINRA Files Enforcement Action Against Hugues Guirand, Formerly of Woodstock Financial Group, Inc. – Virginia Beach, VA

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Department of Enforcement has filed a disciplinary proceeding complaint against former broker Hugues Guirand. The complaint alleges that Mr. Guirand failed to cooperate with a FINRA investigation after a former customer filed a securities arbitration claim alleging that Mr. Guirand solicited the customer’s investment in real estate transactions without the firm’s approval. At the time of the alleged conduct, Mr. Guirand was associated with Woodstock Financial Group, Inc.

If you or a loved one were a customer of broker Hugues Guirand, or Woodstock Financial Group, Inc., contact securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential review of your legal rights.

FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding No. 2020068395801

On April 12, 2021, the FINRA Department of Enforcement filed a complaint against broker Hugues Guirand. The complaint includes the following allegations:

• On October 19, 2020, one of Mr. Guirand’s former customers filed a statement of claim with FINRA Dispute Resolution Services alleging that Guirand solicited the customer’s investment in real estate transactions without the firm’s approval.
• FINRA commenced an investigation into Mr. Guirand’s conduct in connection with the real estate transactions.
• Between November 13, 2020, and February 26, 2021, pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, FINRA staff sent Mr. Guirand and his counsel numerous requests for documents, information, and to appear for on-the-record testimony.
• Guirand failed to provide documents and information in response to the two requests and appear and provide testimony on two occasions. Mr. Guirand’s failure to cooperate impeded FINRA’s investigation and deprived it of material information in Mr. Guirand’s possession.
• By failing to provide information and documents in response to the two requests and by failing to appear and provide testimony requested pursuant to Rule 8210 on two occasions, Mr. Guirand violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010.

Financial Advisor Hugues Guirand (CRD No. 3045595)

Mr. Guirand had 20 years of experience in the securities industry and has been associated with five different brokerage firms, including two of which have been expelled from the securities industry by FINRA:

• Woodstock Financial Group, Inc, in Virginia Beach, VA, from July 2007 to April 2019.
• Quest Capital Strategies, Inc., in Laguna Hills, CA, from June 2005 to July 2007.
• Archer Alexander Securities Corporation (Expelled by FINRA), in Kansas City, MO, from April 2005 to June 2005.
• Financial World Corporation, in Overland Park, KS, from July 2002 to April 2005.
• Raike Financial Group Inc, in Woodstock, GA, from August 2000 to July 2002.
• The Minneapolis Company, Inc. (Expelled by FINRA), in Melville, NY, from July 1998 to August 2000.

According to his public disclosure report with FINRA, Mr. Guirand has been the subject of numerous tax liens:

• $21,628.12 tax lien (2015).
• $2,399.13 tax lien (2015).
• $53,524.36 tax lien (2015).
• $38,346.68 tax lien (2010).

Woodstock Financial Group, Inc – Supervisory Duties

Brokerage firms like Woodstock Financial Group, Inc must properly supervise financial advisors and customer accounts. Brokerage firms must also establish and maintain a reasonably designed system to oversee account activity to ensure compliance with securities laws and industry regulations. When a brokerage firm fails to sufficiently supervise their financial advisors or the investment account activity, it may be liable for investment losses sustained by customers.

How to Recover Financial Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

If you or a loved one were a customer of Hugues Guirand, or Woodstock Financial Group, Inc and either sustained financial losses or suspect that Mr. Guirand did not have your best interest in mind when recommending investments or making account transactions, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential evaluation of your account.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. Iorio Altamirano LLP pursues FINRA arbitration claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses arising out of wrongful conduct by stockbrokers and brokerage firms.

Mr. Francis was a broker at MML Investors Services, LLC, Inc. in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, from July 2008 to May 2017. At that time, MML terminated his employment connected with an investigation into an undisclosed outside business activity, selling away, and an unauthorized non-securities life insurance transaction. In August 2018, Mr. Francis pleaded guilty to wire fraud after admitting that between June 25, 2012, and May 31, 2017, he devised a scheme to defraud at least eleven investors out of approximately $665,000. Mr. Francis was subsequently sentenced to 41 months in prison and ordered to pay over $420,000 in restitution to clients. In May 2019, he was also barred by the SEC from association from associating with any broker, dealer, or investment advisor.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is also investigating the sales practices and due diligence of MML Investors Services, LLC related to its sale of GPB Capital funds. It is believed, according to reports, that MML has been subjected to numerous lawsuits from customers in the form of FINRA securities arbitration claims to recover investment losses.

Securities arbitration is a unique and complex practice area. Investors should seek out experienced counsel who can navigate the arbitration process and effectively advocate on their behalf.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm located in the heart of New York City. Iorio Altamirano LLP represents investors nationwide who have suffered investment losses due to securities fraud.

If you have suffered financial losses as a result of any of the following GPB private placement offerings, contact Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential review of your legal rights:

• GPB Automotive Portfolio, LP
• GPB Cold Storage LP
• GPB Holdings, LP
• GPB Holdings II, LP
• GPB Holdings III, LP
• GPB Holdings Qualified, LP
• GPB NYC Development, LP
• GPB Waste Management Fund, LP

Financial Advisor Oscar Francis (CRD No. 5094722)

Mr. Francis had 11 years of experience and has been associated with three different brokerage firms:

• MML Investors Services, LLC in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, from July 2008 to May 2017.
• AXA Advisors, LLC in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, from March 2007 to July 2018.
• Raymond James & Associates, Inc. in Boca Raton, FL, from April 2006 to February 2007.

MML Investors Services fired Mr. Francis on May 31, 2017, connected with a U.S. Department of Justice investigation into an undisclosed outside business activity and selling away. In August 2018, Mr. Francis pleaded guilty to wire fraud after admitting that between June 25, 2012, and May 31, 2017, he devised a scheme to defraud at least eleven investors out of approximately $665,000. Mr. Francis solicited his MML Investor Services clients, with whom he attended church, to invest in Mahum, Inc., which he incorporated and controlled. Mr. Francis falsely represented that Mahum, Inc. was affiliated with MML, and the investments in Mahum, Inc. would generate high rates of return. Mr. Francis also stole the funds he received, spending them on cocaine, alcohol, strip clubs, and luxury items. When investors inquired or complained about their investments’ status, Mr. Franciss would obtain loans and use other investment funds to repay the investors to prevent them from reporting Mr. Francis’s activity to MML or law enforcement.

Mr. Francis was subsequently sentenced to 41 months in prison and ordered to pay over $420,000 in restitution to clients. In May 2019, he was also barred by the SEC from association from associating with any broker, dealer, or investment advisor.

According to Mr. Francis’s public disclosure report with FIRNA, MML Investor Services, LLC has paid nearly $400,000 to five complaining customers:

• Customer Dispute (December 2018): In December 2018, a customer filed a complaint alleging $24,000 in damages. The customer alleged that in 2016, he believed that he was investing in a MassMutual product, which was later discovered to be a fraudulent investment, in which Mr. Francis misappropriated client funds. MML Investor Services, LLC settled the matter for $31,828.
• Customer Dispute (November 2018): In November 2018, a customer filed a complaint alleging $59,360 in damages. The customer alleged that in 2016, he believed that he was investing in a MassMutual product, which was later discovered to be a fraudulent investment, in which Mr. Francis misappropriated client funds. MML Investor Services, LLC settled the matter for $59,540.95.
• Customer Dispute (August 2017): In August 2017, a customer filed a complaint alleging $20,000 in damages. The customer alleged that in 2016, he believed that he was investing in a MassMutual product, which was later discovered to be an unapproved investment. MML Investor Services, LLC settled the matter for $20,370.
• Customer Dispute (August 2017): In August 2017, a customer filed a complaint alleging that in 2016 he believed that he was investing in a MassMutual product, which was later discovered to be an unapproved investment. MML Investor Services, LLC settled the matter for $44,321.
• Customer Dispute (May 2017): In May 2017, a customer filed a complaint alleging that in 2016 he believed that he was investing in a MassMutual product, which was later discovered to be an unapproved investment. MML Investor Services, LLC settled the matter for $243,652.

How to Recover Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

If you have suffered financial losses investing with Mr. Francis or MML Investor Services, LLC, or suspect that Mr. Francis did not have your best interest in mind when recommending an investment, such as one of the GPB Capital notes, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential evaluation of your account.

• a censure;
• a $20,000 fine; and
• restitution of $7,083.93 plus interest to customers.

Dawson James Securities, Inc’s principal place of business is in Boca Raton, Florida. The firm also has branch offices in Dayton, Maryland, and Manasquan, New Jersey.

If you are a customer of Dawson James and you have suffered financial losses, or have otherwise been harmed, contact securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential review of your legal rights.

Customers that receive a partial recovery of losses through FINRA’s restitution order may still be entitled to additional recovery.

Dawson James Securities, Inc.

Dawson James Securities, Inc. is an SEC-registered broker-dealer with its principal place of business in Boca Raton, Florida. The firm has been a FINRA member since 2004. Dawson James currently employs approximately 40 registered representatives working out of three branch office locations: Boca Raton, Florida; Dayton, Maryland; and Manasquan, New Jersey. The firm’s business includes securities underwriting and retail brokerage services.

FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent No. 2017052790301

FINRA and Dawson James entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent on April 6, 2021, after alleging that from June 2015 through April 2020, Dawson James charged customers excessive commissions on 236 transactions.

FINRA Rule 2010 requires that “[a] member, in the conduct of its business, shall observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.”

FINRA Rule 2121 Supplementary Material .01 set a guideline of five percent for determining whether a commission is unfair or unreasonable. However, the “5% Policy” is a guide, not a rule. A commission pattern of five percent or even less may be considered unfair or unreasonable.

The percentage of the commission is only one of the factors to be considered in determining fairness. FINRA Rule 2121 Supplementary Material .01 identify seven other factors that members should take into consideration in determining the fairness of a commission, including (i) the type of security involved; (ii) the availability of the security; (iii) the price of the security; (iv) the size of the transaction; (v) whether the member disclosed the transaction cost to the customer prior to the trade; (vi) any pattern of markups; and (vii) the nature of the member’s business, including the cost of providing services to customers, particularly when they are of a continuing nature.

The FINRA AWC specifically alleged:

• During the period of June 2015 through April 2020, Dawson James charged commissions on certain transactions in equity securities that were not fair and reasonable, taking into consideration the factors set forth in Rule 2121 Supplementary Material .01, and that exceeded five percent.
• As a result, on a total of 236 transactions during the relevant period, the firm charged $7,083.93 in excessive commissions.
• The commissions charged ranged from approximately five percent to 66 percent of the transactions’ principal value.

As a result, Dawson James violated FINRA Rules 2121 and 2010.

How to Recover Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

If you or a loved one were a customer of Dawson James and either sustained financial losses or suspect inappropriate activity in your investment or retirement accounts, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential evaluation of your account.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. Iorio Altamirano LLP pursues FINRA arbitration claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses arising out of wrongful conduct by stockbrokers and brokerage firms.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a bilingual law firm, fluent in both English and Spanish.

On December 1, 2020, FINRA’s Department of Enforcement filed a three-cause complaint against Mr. Stevens. The first cause of action charged that Mr. Stevens willfully failed to disclose a judgment and three tax liens on his Uniform Application for Securities Industry Registration or Transfer (Form U4). The second cause of action alleged that Mr. Stevens falsely represented to his firm that he did not have any unreported liens. The third cause of action alleged that Mr. Stevens failed twice to appear and testify at an on-the-record interview.

Mr. Stevens then failed to appear at two-pear hearing conferences scheduled by the hearing officer. FINRA’s Department of Enforcement then requested a default decision, which the hearing officer granted.

Mr. Stevens has been associated with the following broker-dealers:

• D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP in St. Augustine, FL, from June 2006 to February 2020.
• NYLife Securities in St. Augustine, FL, from July 1987 to May 2006.
• Eagle Strategies Corp, from February 1995 to December 1996.

As discussed more fully below, Mr. Stevens has also been the subject of numerous customer disputes that have resulted in monetary settlements to customers.

If you have suffered financial losses investing with Mr. Stevens or suspect that Mr. Stevens did not have your best interest in mind when recommending an investment, account transactions, or annuities, contact New York securities arbitration law firm Iorio Altamirano LLP for a free and confidential review of your account or annuity contract.

Iorio Altamirano LLP represents investors that have disputes with their financial advisors or brokerage firms, such as Cetera Advisor Networks LLC and Summit Brokerage Services, Inc.

Financial Advisor Charles Thomas Stevens (CRD No. 1698058)

Mr. Stevens has 32 years of experience in the securities industry and has been associated with three brokerage firms.

According to his BrokerCheck report, Mr. Stevens has recently been the subject of three customer complaints concerning investment recommendations that he made related to real estate investment trusts (“REITs”), Business Development Companies (“BDCs”), and variable annuities.

• Customer Dispute (July 2019): In July 2019, a customer filed a securities arbitration complaint seeking $100,000 in damages and alleging that Mr. Stevens made an unsuitable recommendation related to REITs. The customer asserted the following causes of action: common law fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, breach of contract. The customer dispute is still pending.
• Customer Dispute (December 2017): In December 2017, a customer filed a securities arbitration complaint seeking $150,000 in damages and alleging that Mr. Stevens made an unsuitable recommendation related to REITs and BDCs. The customer asserted the following causes of action: unsuitable recommendations, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, failure to supervise, and breach of contract. The dispute was settled by D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP, for $30,000.
• Customer Dispute (August 2017): In August 2017, a customer filed a securities arbitration complaint alleging that Mr. Stevens made an unsuitable recommendation related to REITs, BDCs, and a variable annuity. The customer asserted the following causes of action: unsuitable recommendations, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, failure to supervise, and breach of contract. The dispute was settled by D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP, for $35,000.

D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP – Supervisory Duties

Brokerage firms like D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP must properly supervise financial advisors and customer accounts. Brokerage firms must also establish and maintain a reasonably designed system to oversee account activity to ensure compliance with securities laws and industry regulations. When a brokerage firm fails to sufficiently supervise its financial advisors or the investment account activity, it may be liable for investment losses sustained by customers.

How to Recover Financial Losses or Obtain a Free Consultation

Securities arbitration is a unique and complex practice area. Investors should seek out experienced counsel who understands the FINRA forum and can navigate the arbitration process to effectively advocate on their behalf.

If you or a loved one were a customer of Charles Stevens or D.H. Hill Securities and either sustained financial losses or suspect inappropriate activity in your investment or retirement accounts, contact New York securities arbitration attorney August Iorio of Iorio Altamirano LLP. August Iorio can be reached at august@ia-law.com or toll-free at (646) 330-4624 for a free and confidential evaluation of your account.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a securities arbitration law firm based in New York, NY. Iorio Altamirano LLP pursues FINRA arbitration claims nationwide on behalf of investors to recover financial losses arising out of wrongful conduct by stockbrokers and brokerage firms.

Iorio Altamirano LLP is a bilingual law firm, fluent in both English and Spanish.