21 de diciembre de 2021

¿Puede un abogado especializado en fraudes en inversiones petroleras ayudarme a recuperar las pérdidas?

Are You Dealing with Oil & Gas Investment Fraud? The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. are investigating claims against brokerage firms that sold either oil or gas stocks and other related products. Investments in the oil and gas sector have been very popular over the last few years, and depending upon when your financial advisor recommended you purchase and/or sell the investments, you may have suffered catastrophic losses.  These losses may have been the result of your financial advisors misrepresentations, omissions and misleading statements, failure to do his/her due diligence investigation, and/or unsuitable recommendations. If you believe you are dealing with oil investment fraud, now is the time to consider hiring an experienced investment fraud lawyer. The attorneys at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. help oil and gas investors review their oil-related investments to determine if they have been the victim of oil investment fraud. Investors who have suffered large losses may be able recover some of their losses through FINRA arbitration against oil brokerage firms which improperly sold oil or oil futures contracts while withholding material information on the risks of investing in oil. Give us a call at 800-732-2889 or contact us online. Let’s discuss your case and see what we can do to help get you the compensation you deserve. What is Considered Oil & Gas Investment Fraud? Oil and gas investments take many different forms, including oil and gas stocks, oil and gas drilling programs, oil and gas limited partnerships, oil futures contracts, oil or gas royalty interests in wells which produce oil through a “fee title” arrangement. Fraudulent oil investment activity may fall into one of two categories: fraud by omission or fraud by commission. Fraud by omission occurs when the seller fails to disclose material information, while oil investment fraud by commission occurs when the seller provides false information to oil investors. Both forms of oil and gas investment fraud can occur at any point during oil or gas investments, including before an oil investor purchases oil stock; while oil stock is held; on the date of purchase; or after oil stocks are sold. The oil and gas industry is heavily regulated, and oil investments are subject to many federal securities laws. If oil brokerage firms fail to follow the law, oil investors may be able to recover damages for oil investment fraud by FINRA arbitration. This means that you only need help finding oil investment fraud cases where brokers failed to comply with federal securities laws or breached their fiduciary duty to oil investors. Investors should always consider oil and gas investments to be high risk due to the volatility in oil prices. Some oil stock brokers have been accused of selling oil stocks at inflated oil prices based on false information, while others may have failed to inform investors of risks associated with a particular oil or gas company. If a brokerage firm did not disclose the risks or oil prices to an oil and gas investor prior to a sale, the oil investment fraud lawyer at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. can help investors recover losses from oil-related investments through FINRA arbitration. Some Oil & Gas Investment Fraud Allegations Include: – Misrepresentation of oil company facts made to oil and gas investors. – Failure to disclose oil stock risks prior to oil & gas investments. – Misleading oil companies by encouraging oil companies to change accounting methods in order to show higher oil reserves than actually exist. Give us a call at 800-732-2889 or contact The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. oil investment fraud law firm online to speak with oil investment fraud attorney Robert Wayne Pearce today about oil and gas stock investments, oil and gas limited partnerships, oil futures contracts and oil and gas drilling programs. Recovering Oil & Gas Investment Losses Through FINRA Arbitration If oil brokerage firms failed to disclose oil stock risks or oil prices prior to oil & gas investments, oil and gas investors may be able to recover oil-related losses by FINRA arbitration. FINRA, the acronym for Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is a non-governmental regulatory association which governs disputes between investors and brokerage firms, including disputes on oil investment fraud allegations. You can learn more about the FINRA arbitration process here. File a Claim with FINRA The formal arbitration process for oil and gas, oil stock fraud cases begins with the filing of a statement of claim by you or your investment fraud attorney. The investor who files the FINRA claim against the brokerage firm is referred to as the “Claimant” in the FINRA arbitration proceedings. If you are an investor, the state of claim is the most important document in your case. This document describes what happened to cause you to lose capital in your oil & gas investment and why you or your FINRA arbitration attorney believes that you are entitled to win a monetary award or relief against the brokerage firm. IMPORTANT: It’s critical that you and/or your attorneys write a clear, concise, accurate, and honest description of what happened as well as a strong case in favor of winning the arbitration. You can learn more about how to file a FINRA complaint and the FINRA complaint process here. The oil fraud attorneys at the Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. are experienced FINRA arbitration lawyers who have a thorough understanding of the arbitration process. We understand what’s at risk in securities, commodities, and investment law issues, and we fight to obtain the best possible outcome every time. Past Investor Recoveries The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., has helped recover millions of dollars in valuable compensation for defrauded investors. Below are some notable victories in past investor recoveries.  $21,041,285 FEDERAL COURT FINAL JUDGMENT In 2010, Robert Pearce won a case in federal court for $21,041,285. The final judgment was entered against the defendant for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and civil theft pursuant to Florida Statutes Sections 812.014 and 772.11. $7,840,000 FINRA ARBITRATION SETTLEMENT...

Continuar leyendo

15 de diciembre de 2021

Anuncio del ganador de 2021 - Beca de sensibilización sobre el fraude de los inversores Robert Wayne Pearce

Como prometimos, hoy anunciamos los ganadores de 2021 de la beca Robert Wayne Pearce de concienciación sobre el fraude en las inversiones. A lo largo del año, recibimos solicitudes de más de 30 estudiantes de escuelas de todo el país que escribieron ensayos de calidad sobre los peligros del fraude en las inversiones y cómo podemos protegernos. Fue una decisión difícil seleccionar a un solo estudiante ganador, por lo que, además del gran premio de 2.500 dólares, hemos seleccionado a otros 5 estudiantes que recibirán premios de consolación de 100 dólares cada uno por sus esfuerzos y por compartir sus ideas sobre el fraude en las inversiones y cómo protegernos. La ganadora de la beca de 2.500 dólares es Karen Simpson, estudiante del Palm Beach State College, que escribió, entre otras cosas El fraude en las inversiones es un problema muy real y serio que ocurre más de lo que se cree. Pero no tiene por qué asustarte a la hora de invertir tu dinero por miedo a perderlo. Aprender sobre los diferentes tipos de fraude en las inversiones y cómo protegerse del fraude, antes de decidirse a invertir, es extremadamente importante. No sólo podría sufrir pérdidas financieras, sino también ver comprometida su identidad, dañado su crédito y sufrir problemas emocionales como la rabia, la frustración y el miedo. *** El conocimiento es poder, por lo que también le recomiendo que se eduque aprendiendo sobre la naturaleza general, la mecánica y los riesgos de los diferentes tipos de inversiones antes de empezar a invertir. Un excelente punto de partida para informarse es Investopedia, www.investopedia.com. También puede encontrar información financiera específica, incluidos los informes anuales, los folletos y las circulares de oferta sobre las empresas recomendadas para comparar lo que le han dicho sobre una inversión recomendada, buscando información en el sitio web de la Comisión de Valores y Bolsa de los Estados Unidos, www.sec.gov/edgar/search-and-access. *** La forma más fácil de protegerse es utilizar el sentido común, buscar las señales de alarma y hacer preguntas. Siga una estricta lista de comprobación de lo que se debe y no se debe hacer, si parece demasiado bueno para ser verdad, en la mayoría de los casos, lo es. Si observa alguna bandera roja en una inversión, evítela, así como a la persona que la recomienda. No se crea ese discurso de "alta rentabilidad garantizada" que tanto les gusta dar. Toda inversión conlleva cierto grado de riesgo, que generalmente se refleja en la tasa de rendimiento que le prometen. Cuanto mayor sea la rentabilidad, mayor será el riesgo. Los ganadores de los premios de consolación de 100 dólares son los siguientes India Bartram de la Universidad de Syracuse, Syracuse, Nueva York Jacob Paul de la Universidad de Villanova -Escuela de Derecho Charles Widger, Villanova, Pennsylvania Kylie Fay de la Universidad del Sur de Alabama, Mobile, Alabama Natalia Capella de la Universidad de Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee Rafael Whalen de la Escuela Católica Juan Pablo El Grande, Escondido, California Agradecemos a todos los demás solicitantes su esfuerzo y anunciamos que la próxima beca, que se concederá el 15 de diciembre de 2022, se otorgará al estudiante que escriba el ensayo más concienzudo sobre si cree que la aplicación de inversión Robinhood Markets, Inc. ("Robinhood") Investment App es una buena herramienta para los inversores principiantes o simplemente un juego para aprovecharse de ellos y ganar dinero para la empresa de corretaje de valores. Nos interesa saber si cree que la plataforma Robinhood está a la altura de la leyenda de Robinhood, ¡que quitaba a los ricos y daba a los pobres!

Continuar leyendo

2 de agosto de 2021

Norma 2165 de la FINRA: Explotación Financiera de Adultos Especificados

Are you curious about how FINRA Rule 2165 can protect you or a loved one who is being financially exploited? FINRA Rule 2165 helps families and brokers who suspect securities fraud in a vulnerable adult’s account. It allows them to take key actions against investment loss.  While their broker may be trustworthy, your parents or other elderly loved ones may reach a point where they are no longer able to make sound investment decisions. A common example of this is when a parent becomes involved in a Ponzi scheme. Another often-seen scenario is when a parent is defrauded into allowing a nefarious third party access to their accounts. Their accounts are quickly drained before an eagle-eyed broker or a caring son or daughter suspects investment fraud. FINRA Rule 2165 is designed with folks like senior citizens in mind. The rule helps a broker look out for their vulnerable clients’ interests. It also enables them to do so before losses become catastrophic.  FINRA Rule 2165: Financial Exploitation Defined FINRA Rule 2165 defines “financial exploitation” as consisting of either of two circumstances. First, Rule 2165 identifies financial exploitation as the wrongful or unauthorized taking or use of a specified adult’s funds or securities. This first definition is very broad and can encompass many types of financial exploitation. Second, Rule 2165 defines financial exploitation as any action or omission, including through a power of attorney or a guardianship, to do any of the following things:  Obtain control over a specified adult’s money, assets, or property through deception, intimidation, or undue influence; or  Steal the specified adult’s money, assets, or property.  FINRA Rule 2165 only protects “specified adults.” These are vulnerable people who may not be able to make their own financial decisions. FINRA Rule 2165 defines a “specified adult” as: A person age 65 or older; or A person age 18 or older who has a mental or physical impairment that impacts their ability to look after their own interests. The financial exploitation definition under FINRA Rule 2165 relates only to actions taken against specified adults. If you do not fit into the category of “specified adult,” you still may have been the victim of securities fraud. If so, it’s important to reach out to an experienced securities fraud attorney as soon as possible.  How FINRA Rule 2165 Protects Vulnerable Adults from Financial Exploitation FINRA Rule 2165 and its sister rule, FINRA Rule 4512, protect vulnerable adults from financial exploitation. These rules work together to allow a vulnerable person’s broker to freeze disbursement of funds from an account suspected of financial exploitation. They also allow a broker to notify a vulnerable person’s important contacts when the broker suspects financial exploitation is taking place. Preventing the Disbursement of Funds When Financial Exploitation Is Suspected A broker is able to place a temporary hold on a disbursement of funds or securities from a specified adult’s brokerage account if/when: A broker has a reasonable belief that financial exploitation has been or will be attempted, has occurred or is occurring; A broker notifies all parties authorized to transact in the account, as well as the account’s trusted contacts, about the temporary hold and the reason for it; and A broker initiates an internal review of why they believe financial exploitation was taking place. The notification to authorized persons on the account can be made orally or in writing (electronic communication is okay) within two business days. Brokers must communicate clearly and quickly about the temporary hold and the reason for the temporary hold. When working with specified adults, a broker needs to maintain a list of trusted contacts. A trusted contact person does not have to be a signatory on the account but can be anyone the broker can share important account information with.  Notification is a very important element of Rule 2165 because placing a hold on client funds is no small matter. However, if the broker suspects that the trusted contact is the person perpetrating the fraud, the broker is no longer under an obligation to notify them.  Rule 2165 Amends Other Protections Against Exploitation The SEC adopted FINRA Rule 2165 in February 2018, which amended FINRA Rule 4512. Previously, Rule 4512 only required brokers to collect and maintain basic personal data about their clients. Now, brokers are required to make reasonable efforts to obtain and maintain the name of a trusted contact person as well.  This revised rule is a great resource for investors and brokers alike. As the investor population ages, trusted contacts can be an excellent resource for brokers to share concerns about unusual client behavior or diminished capacity to make investment decisions. Early communication can lead to better results for investors, caregivers, and brokers. It can even prevent financial exploitation in the first place. Brokers Are Responsible for Compliance  Brokers now must make decisions about whether their clients have the ability to make financial decisions for themselves. This can be difficult and even embarrassing where brokers and clients have worked together for many years. Cognitive abilities of aging people and people with disabilities can change dramatically in short periods of time. Determining if and when a client is at risk of financial exploitation is a very delicate task. The responsibility falls on brokers to understand when transactions are legitimate or not.  Contact a Securities Fraud Attorney If you or a loved one has been financially exploited, you may have a legal right to pursue action against responsible parties. Experience is key in litigating cases like these. We at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., are eager to help you understand your rights. Robert Pearce has many years of experience in the area of securities fraud. He has arbitrated and mediated hundreds of investment-related disputes in his career. Our team of experienced investment loss litigators has recovered over $170 million dollars for well-qualified investors. We help investors nationwide and internationally pursue claims for a variety of investment losses and frauds. Contact us today about a free initial consultation on your...

Continuar leyendo

2 de agosto de 2021

Cómo denunciar un esquema de Ponzi

Ponzi-like schemes swindle investors out of millions of dollars every year. A common form of investment fraud, a Ponzi scheme occurs when existing investors receive distributions from funds provided by new investors rather than as a result of profits. Because Ponzi schemes can only function as long as new investors are providing funds, the schemes eventually collapse, resulting in significant losses for new and old investors. While Ponzi schemes are illegal, they nevertheless continue to exist. In fact, some sources have noted that in 2020 Ponzi schemes hit their highest levels in a decade.  If you are a victim of a Ponzi scheme, you may be wondering what recourse you have. Fortunately, there are actions you can take. By reporting a Ponzi scheme, you can help hold these fraudsters accountable and prevent other victims from being taken advantage of as well.  Don’t know where to begin? Contact attorney Robert Wayne Pearce today to learn more about how to report a Ponzi scheme and see what our team can do to help.  What Is a Ponzi Scheme? Financial advisors recommend investment strategies to investors based on their investment profile. In many situations, investors seek investments likely to result in returns based on the profitability of the investment. In a Ponzi scheme, investors do receive “returns.” However, these returns are not from the profits of their investment. Rather, the operator of the Ponzi scheme will issue payments to earlier investors from the new investment funds provided by newer investors. Inevitably, Ponzi schemes will run out of new investors who are willing to invest in the scheme. This results in the inability to issue the fraudulent returns to older investors and causes the entire scheme to crumble. In an ideal world, these types of fraudulent schemes would not exist. Unfortunately, however, there is always some risk that you could fall victim to a Ponzi or Ponzi-like scheme. What’s important is that you know where to turn and what steps you can take moving forward.  If you suspect you invested in a Ponzi scheme, consult with an investment lawyer who can explain the steps you should take next. With over 40 years representing investors, attorney Robert Pearce has the knowledge and experience you need to help you fight for your rights and recovery.  Examples of SEC Enforcement Actions Against Ponzi Schemes In April 2021, the SEC charged Los Angeles-based actor Zachary Horwitz and his company, 1inMM Capital, LLC, in connection with a Ponzi scheme that reportedly raised over $690 million from investors.  Horwitz and his company represented to investors that the investment funds would be used to purchase film rights and that the films would then be sold to Netflix or HBO. Horwitz allegedly claimed to have an extensive track record of selling movie rights to Netflix and HBO, despite the fact that he never maintained a business relationship with either company.  1inMM and Horowitz reportedly promised investors returns in excess of 35%. Instead, Horwitz paid early investors with the funds provided by new investors and misappropriated millions of dollars for himself. In January 2020, the SEC charged California-based husband and wife Jeffrey and Paulette Carpoff with orchestrating a nearly billion-dollar Ponzi scheme involving alternative energy tax credits.  The pair reportedly raised approximately $910 million from 17 investors between 2011 and 2018 by offering securities in the form of investment contracts through two solar generator companies, DC Solar Solutions, Inc., and DC Solar Distributions, Inc. The SEC alleged that the couple used at least $170 million of the investors’ funds to fund their lifestyle and used the remaining funds to issue dividends to earlier investors. If you have fallen victim to a Ponzi scheme, know that you are not alone. Reach out to our investment loss attorneys today to get started on the pathway toward recovery.  Indicators of a Ponzi Scheme Ponzi schemes come in many different shapes and sizes. However, there are certain common indicators of a Ponzi scheme that you should be aware of.  Many red flags associated with Ponzi schemes present themselves prior to and during the investment process. Recognition of these characteristics before making your investment can prevent you from suffering serious losses down the road. Common indicators of a Ponzi scheme include: Promises of high returns with little or no risk; Returns that are overly consistent; The sale of unregistered investments; A lack of transparency regarding the investment strategy; Errors or discrepancies on account statements; and Difficulty receiving or cashing out your payments. The presence of red flags such as these may signal the existence of illegal activity. If you experience any of these issues with your investments, a securities lawyer can help you determine if you invested in a Ponzi scheme.  Reporting a Ponzi Scheme Ponzi schemes can cost investors millions of dollars in losses. In an attempt to curb the operation of the fraudulent schemes, the SEC and FBI provide resources for individuals who suspect Ponzi schemes to report the misconduct. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) The FBI provides an electronic tip form to individuals wishing to report federal law violations. Additionally, for internet-based crimes, the FBI offers another way to submit a tip. Because many Ponzi schemes begin and operate online, this might be the best place to report a Ponzi scheme. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) The SEC also provides defrauded investors an avenue to report suspected Ponzi schemes and other fraudulent activities. SEC Ponzi scheme tips can be submitted online directly through the SEC website.  Contact an Investment Loss Attorney Today Losing your valuable and hard-earned money in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme is never easy. If this has happened to you, we want to help. At the Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., we have decades of experience helping investment loss victims in need. Firm founder and lead attorney Robert Pearce has recovered funds for over 99% of his investor clients and recovered over $100 million in the last 20 years alone through court litigation, arbitration, and settlements.  Want to know more about...

Continuar leyendo

2 de agosto de 2021

Consejos para contratar al mejor abogado de inversión en productos estructurados

Investment vehicles come in a variety of forms, each with their own benefits and risks. Structured products are one such vehicle. These products can offer a compelling return, but at the cost of increased risk and complexity. If you lost money on a structured product investment, you may be able to file a claim to recover losses with the help of an investment lawyer. What Is a Structured Product? In short, a structured product is a type of security derived from or based on one or more other securities. The defining feature of a structured product, however, is that its return is based on the performance of the underlying asset. Structured products offer a great deal of customization that allows brokers to tailor the risk profile to each individual investor. At the same time, however, they are complicated securities with a level of risk that make them inappropriate for many investors. This complexity makes it more important than ever to make sure you have the best investment lawyer if you lose money on one of these products. Tip #1: Make Sure They Are Familiar with Structured Product Investments As explained above, structured product investments are fairly complex. Your investment lawyer needs to understand that complexity to properly represent you. Even if most investment lawyers are generally familiar with different investment products, a structured product investment lawyer will have additional experience working on cases involving these securities. Tip #2: Make Sure They Understand the Specific Risks of Structured Product Investments As an investor, you’ve no doubt been told many times about the risks involved with particular investments. Your investment lawyer should have the same understanding of those risks. Not only will this allow the lawyer to better understand your particular situation, it also means they will be more familiar with the ways in which a broker may cause you to lose money. For example, making sure your investments are suitable for you is a large part of a broker’s responsibility. Considerations as to the suitability of a structured product generally include: The volatility of the underlying asset; Tax implications based on structured products being considered “contingent payment debt instruments” by the IRS; Limits or caps on the product’s pay-outs; Accurately assessing the price of the product; Lack of an established trading market for structured products; and Loss of principal. Because structured products are so customizable, the specific risks associated with a specific structured product investment may vary. Tip #3: Ask About Their Experience with FINRA Arbitration and Mediation Many brokerage firms require investors to agree to arbitration when they open a brokerage account. While similar to court proceedings, arbitration is somewhat different and requires its own set of skills. At our firm, for example, Robert Wayne Pearce has handled arbitration and mediation before many regulatory authorities, including the Securities and Exchange Commission. In summary, the best investment lawyers will be those with experience in the specific types of proceedings relevant to your case. Tip #4: Ask Them About Their Familiarity with FINRA Rules and Broker Responsibilities The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), administers the set of rules that bind brokers and protect investors. Understanding these rules is just as important for investment lawyers as for brokers. Only with a deep understanding of the FINRA rules can a lawyer provide the most thorough representation to protect your rights. For example, FINRA rules prohibit brokers from “selling away,” a term for selling securities not offered by their brokerage firm. Unfortunately, brokers sometimes offer unapproved securities to their clients. With structured products, the risk can be especially high. Additionally, keep in mind that not all broker violations are obvious. Every investor’s situation is slightly different, and the way in which a broker might harm an investor is highly dependent on the facts of each case. Accordingly, you can’t go wrong by having a lawyer with experience who has handled structured investment loss claims before. Tip #4: Assess Whether You Get Along with Them An often-overlooked part of hiring legal counsel is whether you actually like your lawyer. While there’s nothing wrong with hiring an attorney based on their pedigree, it’s important not to forget that your attorney should also be someone you can work with. As with any other professional service, you shouldn’t have to put up with an attorney you dislike, especially if your case will last a long time. When you’re looking for an investment lawyer, figure out what kind of lawyer you’d like: do you prefer someone who doesn’t bother you unless there’s a major development, or would you rather be kept in the loop with more frequent updates? Do you value a friendly “bedside manner,” or are you ok with stricter professionalism? Tip #5: Ask Them About Previous Experience Handling Similar Cases Structured investment product claims may involve unique or complex issues. An attorney with previous experience handling such claims will be much better equipped to help you recover losses if possible. Tip #6: Find Out Their Track Record of Obtaining Settlements Investment lawyers typically include information about their past settlement awards directly on their website. If they don’t, it’s something you can ask about during your initial consultation. The best structured product investment lawyer will be one with a proven track record of winning cases for clients. Tip #7: Confirm Their Reputation Within the Legal Community As members of a profession with a high ethical standard, a lawyer’s reputation is hugely important. Whatever the size of the firm, it can be useful to vet their reputation like you would with another personal service. State and local bar associations and personal recommendations are a good way to evaluate any attorney. You can also check resources like the Martindale-Hubbell peer rating program, which ranks attorneys based on peer ratings and client reviews. Ready to Hire an Investment Lawyer? The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. is a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent rated firm with more than 40 years of experience representing investors and brokers. If you lost money through a structured...

Continuar leyendo

13 de julio de 2021

Comprender la regla 2111 de la FINRA: la idoneidad

As an investor, you may have heard of FINRA Rule 2111, also known as the suitability rule. But what exactly is FINRA 2111? And how does it affect you and your investments?  When you hire a brokerage firm or financial advisor to make transaction or investment strategy recommendations, you expect that they will do so in a manner that is suitable for you and your particular circumstances. Unfortunately, however, this is not always the case. If you have suffered financial losses as a result of unsuitable investment strategies and recommendations by your financial advisor, contact securities law attorney Robert Wayne Pearce today.  An Overview of FINRA Rule 2111 Suitability in investing is an overarching concept that describes whether an individual investment is suitable for a client after consideration of that particular client’s characteristics.  The suitability rule requires financial advisors to have a “reasonable basis” to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy is suitable for their client. A financial advisor determines the suitability of a particular transaction or investment strategy through learning about the investment profile of his or her customer. Experts interpret FINRA Rule 2111 as requiring financial advisors to make recommendations that are in their customer’s best interests. FINRA outlines situations involving financial advisors violating the suitability rule by placing their interests above the interests of their client, including: Financial advisors who recommend that clients use margin to purchase a larger number of securities to increase commissions;  Brokers who recommend unsuitable securities with high commissions because of pressure from their firm to sell the securities; or A broker who recommends one product over another with the goal of earning more commissions. Unsuitable investment recommendations lead to thousands of dollars in losses for investors every year based on financial advisors recommending products that are illiquid, speculative, and high-risk. If this has happened to you, contact an experienced investment losses attorney today to get started on your case. Suitability Obligations Imposed by FINRA Rule 2111 Rule 2111 consists of three primary obligations: reasonable basis suitability, customer-specific suitability, and quantitative suitability. Reasonable Basis Suitability Reasonable basis suitability mandates that a financial advisor have a reasonable basis, based on reasonable diligence, to believe that a recommendation is suitable for the public at large. This reasonable diligence should provide the financial advisor with a basic understanding of risks and rewards associated with the recommended transaction or investment strategy.  A broker must comprehend the risks and rewards associated with a particular investment. Failure to do so and recommending the investment to a client anyway could result in charges of misrepresenting the investment.  If a broker fails to comply with any of these requirements, the reasonable basis suitability obligation is not met.  Customer-Specific Suitability Customer-specific suitability involves considering specific details about an individual customer to determine whether a transaction or investment strategy is suitable.  A customer’s characteristics that are to be considered during a suitability analysis include: Employment status, Age, Financial situation, Tax status, Experience investing, Investment goals, Risk tolerance, Liquidity needs, and Investment time horizon. The financial advisor should evaluate these characteristics in determining whether the investment or strategy is suitable for that particular customer. Quantitative Suitability The quantitative suitability element evaluates the volume of trades made by a financial advisor.  For a quantitative suitability analysis, transactions made in a customer’s investment account are viewed in the aggregate. The question is whether the investments recommended qualify as a suitable strategy overall, not whether each individual transaction was suitable. The quantitative suitability obligation seeks to prevent financial advisors from making excessive trades in a client’s account solely for the purpose of generating commission fees.  Contact an Investment Loss Attorney Today FINRA 2111 investment loss cases can be particularly complex. That’s why it is important to have an experienced investment loss attorney in your corner.  Since 1980, the attorneys at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., have represented countless investors as they fight for their rights. If you are a victim of broker negligence or misconduct, we want to help. We have recovered over $170 million for well-deserving clients, and we will fight to get you the results you deserve too.  Contact our team today for your free case evaluation, and see what we can do for you.

Continuar leyendo

13 de julio de 2021

Norma FINRA 2010: Normas de Honor Comercial y Principios de Comercio

La regla 2010 de la FINRA establece que los miembros de la FINRA deben observar "altos estándares de honorabilidad comercial y principios justos y equitativos de comercio" en la conducción de sus negocios. Si esta regla le parece amplia, es porque lo es. Y, por desgracia, los miembros de la FINRA no siempre están a la altura de estas elevadas normas prescritas en la Regla 2010 de la FINRA. Entonces, ¿qué hacer si su corredor o asesor financiero no ha cumplido con sus obligaciones bajo la FINRA 2010? La mala conducta de los corredores cuesta a los inversores millones de dólares en pérdidas de inversión cada año. Dichas pérdidas son a menudo el resultado de un fraude, una tergiversación o una supervisión negligente de su cuenta. Aunque esta mala conducta puede tener graves consecuencias financieras para usted, afortunadamente existen vías para exigir responsabilidades a estos infractores. Si usted ha sufrido pérdidas que usted cree que son el resultado de su corredor de no mantener los altos estándares de honor comercial y los principios equitativos de comercio, póngase en contacto con The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. Discutir su caso con un abogado de pérdida de la inversión con experiencia tan pronto como sea posible para ver cómo usted puede ser capaz de recuperar. Resumen de otras reglas notables de la FINRA Normalmente, las reglas de la FINRA describen la conducta específica prohibida por la propia regla. Por ejemplo: La Regla 1122 de la FINRA prohíbe a los miembros de la FINRA y a otras personas presentar información de membresía o de registro en la FINRA que contenga información incompleta o inexacta; la Regla 2111 de la FINRA requiere que los corredores sólo recomienden inversiones o estrategias de inversión que sean adecuadas para el cliente; y la Regla 5270 de la FINRA prohíbe la ejecución frontal de transacciones en bloque. Entonces, ¿dónde entra en juego la norma FINRA 2010? A menudo, los inversores utilizan la Regla 2010 para hacer frente a una mala conducta no descrita en otras reglas de la FINRA. La Regla 2010 funciona como una disposición general para proteger a los inversores de la negligencia financiera y otras prácticas poco éticas por parte de los asesores e instituciones financieras. ¿Qué prohíbe la Regla 2010? La Regla 2010 sanciona a los corredores por mala fe o por una conducta poco ética "relacionada con el negocio". Recibir una sanción en virtud de la Regla 2010 no significa necesariamente que el corredor haya violado la ley, aunque una violación de la ley de valores por sí misma apoya la conclusión de que un corredor ha violado la Regla 2010. Las conductas consideradas poco éticas o inmorales, aunque no necesariamente prohibidas por la ley, autorizan la aplicación de medidas disciplinarias en virtud de la regla. Requisito relacionado con el negocio La Regla 2010 de FINRA ordena que la supuesta mala conducta esté relacionada con el negocio para calificar para la disciplina bajo esta regla. En una acción disciplinaria de la FINRA de 2019, un Panel de Audiencia de la FINRA explicó que la relación entre las acciones poco éticas del miembro de la FINRA y la conducta de su negocio de valores no tiene que estar estrechamente conectada. Más bien, el Panel dio a entender que la Regla 2010 se extiende a cualquier mala conducta que "se refleje en la capacidad de la persona asociada para cumplir con los requisitos reglamentarios del negocio de valores y para cumplir con [sus] deberes fiduciarios en el manejo del dinero de otras personas". Ejemplos de violaciones de la Regla 2010 de la FINRA En última instancia, cada caso en el que se alega una violación de la Regla 2010 requiere un análisis individual para determinar si la mala conducta equivale a una violación de la regla. Para determinar si la regla fue violada, se requiere la evaluación tanto de la totalidad de las circunstancias como del contexto de la mala conducta. Recuerde que una infracción de la Norma 2010 se produce incluso en circunstancias en las que el corredor no comete una infracción de la ley estatal o federal. Las acciones que se consideran una violación de la Regla 2010 incluyen Apropiación indebida de fondos de clientes o de un empleador; Compartir la información confidencial de los clientes sin aprobación; Falsificar firmas; Hacer alteraciones en documentos financieros importantes; Solicitar donaciones para beneficio personal u otros usos no autorizados; Tergiversar la información financiera a los clientes; y Negarse a pagar los honorarios de los abogados y otros gastos después de iniciar un litigio contra un cliente. Las acusaciones de la Regla 2010 surgen con frecuencia en conjunto con las acusaciones de que un corredor violó otra Regla de la FINRA. Póngase en contacto con un abogado de pérdidas de inversión para responder a sus preguntas sobre la Regla 2010 Podría decirse que el núcleo de la regulación de valores es la FINRA 2010. Sin esta regla, los miembros de la FINRA no tendrían la obligación general de llevar a cabo sus negocios con tan altos estándares de honor e integridad. Por supuesto, incluso con la Norma 2010 en vigor, los miembros de la FINRA inevitablemente no cumplirán con estas normas. Con más de 40 años de experiencia en la representación de los inversores y la celebración de sus corredores y asesores financieros responsables de la mala conducta, usted puede estar seguro de que nuestro equipo tiene el conocimiento y los recursos necesarios para luchar por usted. El abogado Robert Pearce tiene un sólido historial de éxitos, recuperando fondos para más del 99% de sus clientes inversores. Para discutir su caso y comenzar el proceso hacia la compensación, póngase en contacto con nosotros hoy para una evaluación gratuita del caso.

Continuar leyendo

9 de julio de 2021

La compra y venta excesiva de valores para generar comisiones se llama "Churning" - ¿Le está pasando a usted?

Muchas personas se preguntan a menudo: ¿es ilegal el churning? La respuesta es sí. Las regulaciones de la SEC y las normas de la FINRA prohíben la práctica de realizar compras o ventas excesivas de valores en cuentas de inversores con el propósito principal de generar comisiones, lo que se conoce como churning. A pesar de la ilegalidad del churning, FINRA presentó 190 acciones de arbitraje para el año 2020 hasta finales de diciembre contra corredores acusados de esta práctica. Si usted sufrió pérdidas en su cuenta de inversión como resultado de la negociación excesiva, póngase en contacto con un abogado de fraude de churning para determinar si tiene derecho a recuperar la compensación. ¿Qué es el churning en las finanzas? El churning, también conocido como trading excesivo, adquiere un nuevo significado en la industria financiera que no tiene nada que ver con la mantequilla. La negociación excesiva se produce cuando un agente de bolsa realiza múltiples operaciones en la cuenta de inversión de un cliente con el objetivo principal de generar altas comisiones. El churning suele provocar pérdidas importantes a los inversores. La Regulación de Mejor Interés de la SEC, o Reg BI, establece una norma de conducta para los corredores de bolsa y sus empleados cuando recomiendan inversiones a clientes minoristas. La Reg BI exige a los corredores que actúen en el mejor interés del cliente y que no antepongan sus propios intereses a los del inversor. El "churning" casi nunca es lo mejor para el inversor, incluso para aquellos que tienen estrategias comerciales agresivas. Señales de que su asesor está haciendo "churning" en su cuenta de inversión El "churning" de las acciones conduce a importantes pérdidas para el inversor, especialmente en situaciones en las que se prolonga durante un largo periodo de tiempo. Muchas veces, los inversores no reconocen los indicadores de que su agente ha cometido el delito de negociación excesiva hasta que es demasiado tarde. Hay una serie de señales de precaución a las que debe prestar atención cuando teme que su asesor financiero esté negociando en exceso en su cuenta. Operaciones no autorizadas Las operaciones no autorizadas se producen cuando un corredor negocia valores en su cuenta de inversión sin recibir autorización previa. Si tiene una cuenta de inversión discrecional, su asesor financiero tiene autorización para realizar operaciones en su cuenta sin pedirle su aprobación para cada transacción; sin embargo, su agente sigue estando obligado a cumplir la norma del mejor interés. Las operaciones excesivas pueden ser más difíciles de detectar con una cuenta discrecional. La aparición de numerosas operaciones no autorizadas en el extracto de su cuenta es motivo de preocupación. Para reconocer estas operaciones, debe revisar el extracto de su cuenta mensualmente y verificar la información proporcionada. Si observa operaciones no autorizadas en el extracto de su cuenta, notifíquelo inmediatamente a su corredor y a su empresa de corretaje. Volumen de operaciones inusualmente alto Un alto volumen de operaciones en un corto periodo de tiempo puede significar que se está produciendo un "churning", especialmente para los inversores que siguen una estrategia de inversión conservadora. Preste especial atención a las transacciones que implican la compra y venta de los mismos valores una y otra vez. El abogado Robert Pearce tiene más de 40 años de experiencia representando a clientes cuya mala conducta de los corredores les causó pérdidas financieras. La amplia experiencia del Sr. Pearce le permite reconocer los indicadores de churning inmediatamente y probar la cantidad de daños que usted sufrió como resultado de la mala conducta de su corredor. Comisiones excesivas Las comisiones inusualmente altas que aparecen en su estado de cuenta es otra indicación de la negociación excesiva. Si las comisiones se disparan significativamente de un mes a otro, o si un segmento de su cartera de inversiones genera sistemáticamente comisiones más altas que cualquier otro segmento, existe la posibilidad de que su corredor esté manipulando su cuenta. Los extractos de cuenta no suelen incluir los importes de las comisiones cobradas por cada transacción individual. Por lo tanto, no dude en ponerse en contacto con su agente de bolsa para pedir una explicación de las comisiones cargadas en su cuenta. Si usted siente que le están cobrando comisiones excesivas en sus cuentas de inversión, póngase en contacto con The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., para discutir sus opciones. Póngase en contacto con nuestra oficina hoy para una consulta gratuita Churning en la industria financiera puede resultar en sanciones monetarias e incluso la inhabilitación de la industria financiera en casos extremos. La práctica implica la manipulación y el engaño de los inversores que confían en sus corredores para actuar en su mejor interés, lo que justifica el castigo severo. Robert Wayne Pearce ha manejado docenas de casos de churning y puede proporcionar una revisión completa de sus estados de cuenta para determinar si se produjo el comercio excesivo. Además, las Oficinas Legales de Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., emplea a expertos que pueden realizar un análisis de la actividad comercial en su cuenta para establecer pruebas concretas de que la práctica se produjo. Tenemos la experiencia, los conocimientos y el compromiso para obtener los daños que usted merece. Póngase en contacto con nuestra oficina hoy para una evaluación gratuita del caso.

Continuar leyendo

9 de julio de 2021

La norma FINRA "Conozca a su cliente" y la idoneidad de la inversión: ¿cómo se aplica a usted?

FINRA regulates the conduct of brokers in the securities industry to protect investors from suffering losses due to financial advisor misconduct. The agency formulates rules to outline the behavior expected of broker-dealers and financial advisors when dealing with their investment clients. Nevertheless, FINRA receives thousands of customer complaints every year alleging violations of FINRA Rules. FINRA Rule 2090, the Know Your Customer (KYC) rule, and FINRA Rule 2111, the suitability rule, mandate minimum knowledge requirements for brokers when making investment recommendations and commonly appear in these customer complaints.  If you suffered investment losses due to unsuitable investment recommendations, The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., can help you determine if your broker violated one of these rules. Contact our office today for a free consultation. FINRA Rule 2090: Know Your Customer Rule FINRA Rule 2090, or the Know Your Client rule, requires financial advisors to know the “essential facts concerning every customer and concerning the authority of each person acting on behalf of such customer” when opening and maintaining a client investment account. The “essential facts” described in the rule include details that are required to: Service the account effectively; Satisfy any special handling instructions for the account; Understand the authority of anyone acting on the customer’s behalf; and Comply with applicable laws, regulations, and rules. The KYC rule protects clients from investment losses by requiring their financial advisor to learn detailed information about their personal financial circumstances. The rule protects financial advisors by outlining the essential information about customers at the outset of the relationship, prior to any recommendations. Additionally, the financial adviser receives notification of any third parties authorized to act on the customer’s behalf. The Know Your Client rule acts in tandem with the suitability rule, FINRA Rule 2111. The information learned by financial advisors through the KYC requirement factors into the analysis of whether an investment recommendation is suitable.  FINRA Rule 2111: Suitability Alleged violation of investment suitability requirements resulted in 1,220 customer complaints filed with FINRA in 2020 alone, down from 1,580 complaints in 2019. The suitability rule requires financial advisors to have a “reasonable basis” to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy is suitable for the customer. A financial advisor determines the suitability of a transaction or investment strategy through ascertaining the customer’s investment profile. Factors involved in a suitability analysis include the customer’s: Age, Investment experience, Financial situation, Tax status, Investment goals, Investment time horizon, Liquidity needs, and Risk tolerance. Numerous cases interpret the FINRA suitability rule as requiring financial advisors to make recommendations that are in the best interest of their customers. FINRA outlines situation where financial advisors have violated the suitability rule by placing their interests above the interests of their client, including: A broker who recommends one product over another to receive larger commissions; Financial advisors who recommend that clients use margin to purchase a larger number of securities to increase commissions; and Brokers who recommend speculative securities with high commissions because of pressure from their firm to sell the securities. Any indication that a financial advisor has placed his or her interests ahead of the client’s interest can support a claim for a violation of the suitability rule. Rule 2111 consists of three primary obligations: (1) reasonable basis suitability, (2) customer-specific suitability, and (3) quantitative suitability. Reasonable Basis Suitability Reasonable basis suitability requires a financial advisor to have a reasonable basis to believe, based on reasonable diligence, that a recommendation is suitable for the public at large. A financial advisor’s reasonable diligence should provide him or her with an understanding of risks and rewards associated with the recommended investment or strategy. A failure to comprehend the risks and rewards associated with a particular investment prior to recommending the investment to a client can result in allegations of misrepresentation or fraud. If a broker fails to perform reasonable diligence regarding either component, the financial advisor violates this obligation. Customer-Specific Suitability Customer-specific suitability involves considering the specific details about an individual customer to determine if a transaction or investment strategy is suitable. The financial advisor reviews the details outlined above to determine the suitability of a particular transaction or strategy for each customer. Quantitative Suitability The quantitative suitability element requires financial advisors to recommend transactions that are suitable when viewed as a whole, not only when viewed in isolation. This element aims to prevent financial advisors from making excessive trades in a client’s account solely for the purpose of generating commission fees. Factors such as turnover rate, cost-equity ratio, and use of in-and-out trading indicate that the quantitative suitability obligation was violated. What Constitutes “Reasonable Diligence”  FINRA’s suitability rule requires brokers to exercise “reasonable diligence” in attempting to obtain customer-specific information. The reasonableness of a financial advisor’s effort to obtain such information will depend on the facts and circumstances of each investment relationship. A financial advisor typically relies on the responses provided by the customer in compiling information relevant to the customer’s investment profile. Some situations may prevent a broker from relying exclusively on a customer’s responses, including times when: A financial advisor poses misleading or confusing questions to a degree that the information-gathering process is tainted; The customer exhibits clear signs of diminished capacity; or Red flags exist that indicate the information may be inaccurate. Additionally, the suitability rule requires brokers to consider any other information provided by the customer in connection with investment recommendations.  Hiring an Investment Loss Attorney Violation of FINRA Rules 2090 and 2111 result in significant financial losses for investors every year. If you suffered losses because of unsuitable investment recommendations, you have the right to seek compensation from the parties responsible for your losses.  Cases against brokers and registered investment advisors can be complex for attorneys without experience in securities law.  Robert Wayne Pearce has over 40 years of experience representing investors in disputes against financial advisors and broker dealers. Mr. Pearce has tried, arbitrated, and mediated hundreds of investment-related disputes involving complex securities and FINRA rule violations. In fact, Mr. Pearce serves...

Continuar leyendo

4 de mayo de 2021

El derecho de los valores en 2021: La Guía Definitiva

The law governing securities evolves constantly to keep pace with changes in the industry. Regulatory agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) F/K/A National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) enforce various rules and regulations designed to promote fair and full disclosure of material facts related to financial markets and individual securities transactions. This guide provides a surface-level overview of the securities laws in the United States and what those laws mean for you. Important Terms in Securities Law A security is an intangible financial instrument that entitles its owner to claims of ownership on assets and earnings of the issuer or the voting power that accompanies the claims. Securities exist in the form of: Notes, Stocks, Treasury stocks, Bonds, Certificates of interest, Collateral trust certificates, Transferable shares, Investment contracts, Voting trust certificates, Certificates of deposit for a security; or A fraction, undivided interest in mineral rights. Stock markets in the United States collect trillions of dollars on investments through the securities trade.  The individuals buying or selling securities are referred to as investors. The term “retail investor” refers to an individual who typically purchases securities from a broker and, in most cases, does not purchase a large quantity of securities. The term “institutional investor,” on the other hand, often refers to a company investing large sums of money in securities.  The company buying and selling securities for investors is known as a broker-dealer. Firms like Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch employ brokers to serve clients by buying and selling securities on their behalf.  History of Federal Securities Law Prior to the Great Depression, the United States lacked an expansive securities regulation at the federal level. As a result, companies falsified and misrepresented financial information without fear of consequences. During the 1920s, the stock market expanded rapidly as the U.S. economy grew and stock prices reached record highs. Between August 1921 and September 1929, the Dow increased by 600%. Excitement surrounding the stock market fueled retail investors to get involved. Many retail investors purchased stocks “on margin,” meaning they only paid a small portion of the stock price and borrowed the remaining amount from a bank or broker. Despite the audacity of the claim, many believed that stock prices would continue rising forever. In early September 1929, stock prices started to decline. Not yet alarmed, many investors saw an opportunity to buy into the stock market at a lower price. The Stock Market Crash of 1929 On October 18, 1929, stock prices decreased more significantly. October 24 signaled the first day of panic among investors. Known as “Black Thursday,” a record 12,894,650 shares were traded throughout the day. On October 28, the Dow suffered a record loss of 38.33 points, or 12.82%. The following day—”Black Tuesday”— held more devastating news for investors as stock prices dropped even more. 16,410,030 shares were traded on the New York Stock Exchange in a single day. The 1929 stock market crash resulted in billions of dollars lost and signaled the beginning of the Great Depression. The Aftermath In the wake of the crash, the U.S. Senate formed a commission responsible for determining the causes. The investigation uncovered a wide range of abusive practices within banks and bank affiliates and spurred public support for banking and securities regulations. As a result of the findings, Congress passed the Banking Act of 1933, the Securities Act of 1933, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. New York County Assistant District Attorney Ferdinand Pecora finalized the final report and conducted hearings on behalf of the commission and was later selected as one of the first commissioners of the SEC. Federal Securities Laws and Regulations The American banking systems suffered significantly in the wake of the stock market crash, as approximately one in three banks closed their doors permanently. Following the crash, the U.S. government imposed tighter rules and regulations on the financial industry. As securities evolve, regulatory agencies are responsible for imposing up-to-date regulations to protect investors. Banking Act of 1933 The Banking Act of 1933 (the Banking Act), implemented by Congress on June 16, 1933, signaled the start of many changes in the securities industry. First, the Banking Act established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), created to provide deposit insurance to depositors in United States depository institutions in an effort to restore the public’s trust in the American banking system.  Glass-Steagall provisions Four sections of the Banking Act—referred to as the Glass-Steagall legislation—addressed the conflicts of interest uncovered by Ferdinand Pecora during his investigation into the stock market crash of 1929. The Glass-Steagall legislation sought to limit the conflicts of interests created when commercial banks are allowed to underwrite stocks and bonds. In the previous decade, banks put their interest in promoting stocks and bonds to their own benefit, rather than considering the risks placed on investors. The new legislation banned commercial banks from: Dealing in non-governmental securities for customers; Investing in non-investment grade securities on behalf of the bank itself; Underwriting or distributing non-governmental securities; and Affiliation or employee sharing with companies involved in such activities. On the other side, the legislation prohibited investment banks from accepting deposits from customers. Deterioration and reinterpretation of Glass-Steagall provisions The separation of commercial and investment banks proved to be a controversial topic throughout the financial industry. Only two years after passing the Banking Act, Senator Carter Glass—the namesake of the provisions—sought to repeal the prohibition on commercial banks underwriting securities, stating that the provisions had unduly damaged securities markets.  Beginning in the 1960s, banks began lobbying Congress to allow them to enter the municipal bond market. In the 1970s, large banks argued that the Glass-Steagall provisions were preventing them from being competitive with foreign securities firms. The Federal Reserve Board reinterpreted Section 20 of the Glass-Steagall provisions to allow banks to have up to 5% of gross revenues from investment banking business. Soon after, the Federal Reserve Board voted to loosen regulations under the Glass-Steagall provisions after hearing arguments from Citicorp,...

Continuar leyendo