Nov 24, 2023

GWG Holdings L Bonds: Complaints & Investment Losses

In recent news, it was reported that GWG Holdings, a Dallas, Texas-based asset manager that provides insurance services, as well as acquires life insurance policies in the secondary market, filed for bankruptcy on April 20, 2022. It is estimated that GWG Holdings has more than $2 billion in liabilities, including $1.3 billion of GWG L bonds, and has missed millions of dollars in combined interest and principal payments to investors owning the GWG L bond series. IMPORTANT: As of February 2022, GWG Holdings has failed to pay $13.6 million in payments to GWG L bondholders. These were high yield, high risk, illiquid investments that as stockbrokers should have been wary and not recommended to investors with conversative or moderate risk tolerances. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. is currently investigating claims against stockbrokers related to recommendations to purchase GWG Holdings L bonds (“GWG L bonds”) and is offering free consultations to those who have suffered GWG L bond losses. If you have suffered GWG L bond investment losses, our experienced securities litigation attorneys are prepared to discuss the matter and provide their legal opinion as to whether you can recover damages against the broker-dealer who recommended and sold you GWG L bonds. Please contact our law firm at 561-338-0037 or online for a free consultation. What are GWG L Bonds? In 2012, GWG Holdings created and has since sold nearly $2 billion in GWG L bonds to investors. These high-yield bonds were unrated and illiquid investments and therefore, unsuitable for investors with conservative or moderate risk tolerances. Need Legal Help? Let’s talk. or, give us a ring at 561-338-0037. GWG Holdings issued the GWG L bonds to raise capital to purchase an individual life insurance policyholder seeking liquidity or cash by selling his/her life insurance policy to GWG Holdings for more than the surrender value but substantially less than the policy’s face value. GWG Holdings would then make the premium payments and hope to receive a payout worth greater than what it paid for the policy after the original policy matures or the policyholder passes away. The subject GWG L bonds were created to finance these life insurance policy purchases by GWG Holdings.  The problem for investors was the GWG L bond investments depended on insurance policy premiums and benefits being paid out according to assumptions and statistical models, thus making them speculative investments for investors seeking income and protection of their capital. Further, GWG L bonds had no secondary market, which prevented investors from liquidating should they need the cash immediately. In other words, money used to purchase GWG L bonds was essentially trapped from the moment of purchase. Moreover, the only collateral supposedly backing GWG Holdings are interests in GWG subsidiary companies that purportedly owned real assets, including the insurance policies. Don’t Be Discouraged by GWG Holdings’ Bankruptcy  As early as April 2022, news sources reported that GWG Holdings was filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. However, this news should not stop investors from seeking the opinion of a skilled and experienced securities attorney and getting just compensation. Broker-dealers and their agents who misrepresented and/or made unsuitable recommendations as to the GWG L bonds may still be held liable for losses in investor accounts. In other words, an account holder can still file a FINRA arbitration against the broker-dealer to recover losses in GWG L bonds for misrepresentations, unsuitable recommendations, failure to conduct adequate due diligence, negligence, etc. You should not let your broker-dealer or broker/financial advisor convince you otherwise. Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. Recovers Investment Losses The attorneys at Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. are experienced in litigating high-yield and speculative fixed-income instrument securities loss cases. For over 40 years we have represented investors in arbitration and securities litigation matters, including FINRA arbitration proceedings in nearly every state. Contact us now at 561-338-0037 or contact us online to schedule your free initial consultation.  GWB L Bonds Were Sold for High Commissions! According to GWG Holdings, the GWG L bonds were sold by Emerson Equity, the managing broker-dealer, which partnered with other brokerage firms that also sold the L bonds to their retail customers. The commissions on such sales by the brokerage firms were as high as 8%. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. suspects that many other broker-dealers were involved in the recommendation and sale of the GWG L bonds to their customers. Some of the firms alleged to have sold L bonds to their customers include: If the name of your broker-dealer does not appear on the list above, do not be alarmed. Rather, call us at 561-338–0037 or contact us online for free consultation to discuss whether you may have a claim to recover damages. Recover Your GWG L Bond Investment Losses in a FINRA Arbitration The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. is prepared to help investors who have sustained damages or monetary losses not only in GWG L bonds but other investments in your account in FINRA arbitration. If you were one of those investors who have suffered losses, you should seek the immediate advice of an experienced investment fraud attorney with more than 40 years of experience representing investors in investment fraud and broker-dealer negligence cases. It is imperative that you seek our consultation as soon as possible, as there are applicable eligibility rule and/or statutes of limitation that may forever bar your claim against the broker-dealer who sold you the GWG L bonds if you do not file your claim in a timely manner.  We Don’t Get Paid Unless You Get Paid! The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. accepts cases on a contingency fee basis. This means if we do not recover money for you, you will not incur any fees owed to our firm. In other words, our attorney’s fees are collected only if we successfully settle your case or obtain a monetary award at the final arbitration hearing. We will also bear the cost of your case through the litigation...

Continuar leyendo

Jul 26, 2023

Ex-Centaurus Financial Broker Joseph Michael Todd Sued

The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. is currently representing a Client of Joseph Michael Todd who has filed an arbitration claim against his employer, Centaurus Financial, Inc. Joseph Michael Todd Formerly With Centaurus Financial, Inc. and Investors Capital Corp. Has Three (3) Customer Complaints For Alleged Broker Misconduct. IMPORTANT: We are providing information about our clients’ allegations and seeking information from other investors who did business with Joseph Michael Todd and had similar investments, a similar investment strategy, and a similar bad experience to help us win our clients’ case. Please contact us online via our contact form or by giving us a ring at (800) 732-2889. Update: SEC Files Suit Against Joseph Michael Todd The SEC finally filed suit against Joseph Michael Todd (“Todd”) engaging in a fraudulent scheme from at least August 2016 through at least November 2022, where he allegedly misappropriated at least $3 million from at least 20 customers of Centaurus Financial, LLC (“Centaurus”), a dually registered broker-dealer and investment adviser that employed Todd as a registered representative. Todd obtained investor funds through deceptive means by instructing his Centaurus customers to write checks payable to his entities Todd Financial Services, LLC (“TFS”) and/or TFS Insurance Services LLC (“TFS Insurance”) or to Todd himself by falsely assuring customers that he and his entities would invest their funds in various securities. Instead, Todd commingled investors’ funds and kept the money for his own personal use, spending it on lavish real estate, boating, hunting, casinos, and adult entertainment. Todd perpetuated the fraud by making material misrepresentations to customers regarding the use of their funds in meetings that took place in person, in phone conversations, and in documents that he prepared and provided to customers. The SEC accused Todd and his entities because of their conduct, Todd, TFS, and TFS Insurance knowingly or recklessly committed securities fraud. In violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), 77e(c), and 77q(a)] and Todd, TFS, and TFS Insurance violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5]. The SEC brought the lawsuit to prevent further harm to investors and to seek disgorgement, civil penalties, permanent injunctions, and conduct-based injunctions stemming from the Defendants’ wrongdoing, and a permanent officer-and-director bar against Todd. Joseph Michael Todd Was Terminated by Centaurus Financial, Inc. On July 21, 2022, Joseph Michael Todd was terminated by Centaurus Financial, Inc. for not cooperating with an ongoing investigation into whether Joseph Michael Todd violated firm policy and industry rules with respect to allegations of selling away and the receipt of customer funds. Our law firm was contacted by a customer of Joseph Michael Todd alleging misappropriation or theft of funds. We are currently investigating such claims and are accepting clients who were victims of Joseph Michael Todd’s alleged misconduct. Joseph Michael Todd was fired from Centaurus Financial in July 2022, according to FINRA’s BrokerCheck. Michael Todd was terminated from Centaurus Financial because of claims he sold investments not authorized by the company, a common practice known as “selling away.” Did Joseph Michael Todd Cause You Investment Losses? Joseph Michael Todd, also known as Michael Todd, Formerly With Centaurus Financial, Inc. and Investors Capital Corp. Has Three (3) Customer Complaints For Alleged Broker Misconduct. If you believe you have suffered investment losses resulting from the conduct of Joseph Michael Todd at Centaurus Financial and Investors Capital Corp. you can contact the securities attorneys at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. for a free consultation to discuss your rights. Joseph Michael Todd Customer Complaints Joseph Michael Todd has been the subject of three (3) customer complaints that we know about, one (1) of those complaints was filed in 2022 to recover investment losses. And One (1) of Joseph Michael Todd’s three (3) customer complaints were settled in favor of investors. However, one (1) of Joseph Michael Todd’s customer complaints was closed, and the customers have not taken any further action. There is currently one (1) pending customer complaint filed against Joseph Michael Todd’s former employer Centaurus Financial, Inc. for investment losses caused by alleged misconduct.  Allegations Against Joseph Michael Todd A sample of the allegations made in the FINRA reported arbitration claim settlements and/or pending complaints for investment losses are as follows:  We currently represent a Client of Joseph Michael Todd who have filed an arbitration claim against his employer, Centaurus Financial, Inc. A summary of the allegations made in the FINRA arbitration filed for investment losses realized by the Claimant were as follows: 1. Introduction Respondent Centaurus employed Joseph Michael Todd (hereafter referred to as either “Mike” or “Mr. Todd”) and held him out as registered representative, investment adviser, investment manager, financial adviser, and financial planner with special skills and expertise in the management of securities portfolios and financial, estate, retirement, and tax planning matters. Centaurus hired Mr. Todd after he was terminated by two prior broker-dealers for violations of industry rules, firm policies and procedures, including allegations of selling unapproved investments and misappropriation. It also permitted Mr. Todd to operate his Centaurus branch offices under the name “Todd Financial Services” as “a DBA for branding purposes.” The Respondent is being sued in its capacity as broker-dealer and investment adviser, investment portfolio manager, financial planner, and/or as an employer whose employees and agents, including, but not limited to, Mr. Todd, committed the acts and omissions which are the subject of this Statement of Claim.  Claimant is a 62-year-old single woman back working 3 months after she had retired and discovered that her Centaurus’ stockbroker and investment advisor Mr. Todd did the following: 1) Stole $425,000 of her funds that were supposed to have been invested in safe, liquid, fixed income securities for her retirement security and income; 2) Acted in his own “best interest” instead of Claimant’s “best interest” in soliciting her to sell $420,000 of her investment grade municipal bonds and reinvesting the sales proceeds in illiquid and high-risk...

Continuar leyendo

Jul 11, 2023

What is Considered a Breach of Fiduciary Duty?

Breaches of fiduciary duty are unfortunately common. Given that fiduciary duty is the highest legal standard of care, any failure to uphold this responsibility can have severe consequences for those who have been entrusted with a fiduciary duty. In this article, we will cover what is a breach of fiduciary duty, common examples, and whether or not you have a legal claim. An investment loss recovery attorney can help you take action against a fiduciary who has acted negligently or wrongly. What is a Breach of Fiduciary Duty? Breach of fiduciary duty occurs when an individual, such as a financial advisor, that has been entrusted with managing the affairs of another fails to act in good faith and is negligent or malicious in their duties. Investment loss? Let’s talk. or, give us a ring at 561-338-0037. A fiduciary is bound to act in the best interests of their client, and when they fail to do so, it can lead to significant financial losses. If you believe you are dealing with investment loss due to a breach of fiduciary duty, you should strongly consider hiring an investment loss attorney. The quicker you reach out, the quicker you can begin the process of recovery. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., offers free consultations. Give us a call at (800) 732-2889. Let’s discuss your case and see what we can do to help you get the compensation you need and deserve. Four Elements of a Breach of Fiduciary Duty Case To prove a breach of fiduciary duty, four key elements must be demonstrated: the existence of a fiduciary duty, a violation of that duty, resulting harm, and a causal connection between the breach and the harm. Duty – There Exists a Fiduciary Duty There must be an established fiduciary relationship between you and the other party for the fiduciary to owe you a duty. To hold a fiduciary accountable to their standard of care, it is essential to demonstrate that they knowingly accepted the role. This is typically shown through a written agreement between the parties, such as a customer agreement. Breach – There Was a Violation of This Duty Fiduciaries are required to work in the best interests of their clients, and any deviation from this standard may constitute a breach. To demonstrate a breach of fiduciary duty, one must have evidence that the individual holding this responsibility acted negligently or maliciously—or prioritized their own interests over yours. This can include lost investments, diminished value of your assets, outright theft, decisions made without your consent, or failure to carry out one’s fiduciary responsibility. You can also prove a breach through the fiduciary’s failure to act—for example, not disclosing a conflict of interest. It is best to speak with an investment fraud lawyer to determine if your fiduciary failed in their responsibility and contributed to your losses. Damages – The Breach of Duty Resulted in Harm to You For there to be a legitimate claim of breach of fiduciary duty, the breach must have caused you to suffer damages. Proving there was a breach is not enough for a valid claim of breach of fiduciary duty. Unless you can demonstrate how the violation of fiduciary duty directly caused you to suffer damages, your claim may not be successful. Damages can be either economic or non-economic, such as mental anguish.  Causation – There is a Connection Between the Breach and the Harm There must be a direct link between the fiduciary’s breach and harm to you. If you incurred damages that cannot be connected to the individual’s breach, your claim may not be successful. Breach of Fiduciary Duty Examples Breaches of fiduciary duties can take many forms. A fiduciary must act in the best interests of their client. When they fail to do so, serious harm can result. Examples of a breach of fiduciary duty include misrepresentation or failure to disclose information, excessive trading, unsuitable investments, failure to diversify, and failure to follow instructions. Misrepresentation or Failure to Disclose Information If a financial advisor does not present a client with all material information about an investment, this is a breach of fiduciary duty. Material information is what a reasonable investor would consider important when deciding whether to invest.  Sometimes financial advisors will mislead investors by omitting information, such as risk factors or any negative information about a stock.  Excessive Trading Excessive trading, also known as churning, in your account is a breach of fiduciary duty. Financial advisors will make large numbers of trades solely to generate more commissions for themselves.  Unsuitable Investments Financial advisors must “know their customer” before making investment recommendations. This includes understanding the client’s investment objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, financial standing, and tax status. The advisor breaches their fiduciary duty if they make an unsuitable investment, even with the best intentions.  Failure to Diversify Your financial advisor must recommend a mix of investments so that your assets are properly allocated among various asset classes and industries. Failing to diversify your portfolio puts you in a position of great risk and is a breach of fiduciary duty. If your assets are over-concentrated in a particular stock or sector, you may experience significant losses if the company or industry does not perform well.  Failure to Follow Instructions When you give instructions to your financial advisor, they have the fiduciary duty to promptly perform your orders. If your advisor fails to follow your instructions in a timely manner and you suffer financial losses, you can recover. Can You Pursue a Lawsuit for a Breach of Fiduciary Duty? Yes, you can pursue a lawsuit for a breach of fiduciary duty. You will need to speak with an investment fraud lawyer to determine if your fiduciary failed in their responsibility and contributed to your losses. It is important that you prove there was a breach, damages were caused, and the breach was directly connected to the harm you suffered in order for your lawsuit to be successful. Do you believe you’ve been the victim of a breach of fiduciary duty? Don’t wait – contact an experienced investment fraud attorney as soon as possible to learn more...

Continuar leyendo

Jul 11, 2023

What Can a Securities Lawyer Do for Investors and Brokers?

The term “securities attorney” refers to an lawyer who concentrates his/her practice on assisting clients in navigating the laws and regulations that govern the purchase and sale of securities. If you’re having difficulties with your financial advisor or broker and suffered investment losses, you might want to hire a securities attorney who knows the securities laws and securities industry rules inside and out.  Brokers and advisors provide investment advice and sell securities products such as stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. When you work with an advisor or broker, you probably signed an agreement that required them to comply with Federal and state securities laws and securities industry rules, including the rules requiring an advisor or broker to only make suitable investment recommendations and to act in your best interest. IMPORTANT: If your financial professional isn’t doing what was agreed to, or if you think they’ve committed securities fraud, you can file a complaint with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). But before you do, you might want to talk to a securities lawyer. You have the right to seek compensation from the parties responsible if you were an investor who lost money as a result of broker misconduct. What Does a Securities Lawyer Do? A securities lawyer specializes in securities laws and regulations that apply to investors, brokers, and financial advisors. Securities lawyers represent investors claiming losses as a result of misconduct or fraud, as well as brokers and financial advisors accused of misconduct by their clients or their employers. Investment Losses? Let’s Talk. or, give us a ring at 800-732-2889. What Are Securities Laws? Securities laws are the laws that regulate the securities industry. The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) is the government agency that oversees the securities industry and enforces the Federal securities laws. These rules are designed to protect investors from fraud and other abuses, and to ensure that the securities industry operates fairly and transparently. Federal law requires companies that sell securities to register with the SEC. This registration process provides important information about a company’s business, its financial condition, and its management. It also gives the SEC important information about the people who sell the company’s securities. The federal securities laws also require those who sell securities to be licensed and to meet other standards of conduct. Investors and brokers use this information to make informed investment decisions. When brokers don’t disclose important information, or make false or misleading statements, they may have committed securities fraud. Further, the SEC provides a forum where investors can bring SEC complaints. The SEC may use these complaints to assist them in SEC investigations and the detection of securities fraud. In comparison to other areas of the law in the United States, there are few securities lawyers. Most lawyers who practice in this area work for the government, regulating or prosecuting firms and individuals who have violated securities law. It’s Important To Find A Good Securities Lawyer Who Represents Investors! There are a few lawyers who represent investors in private lawsuits and arbitrations against firms or individuals who have committed fraud and violated other securities laws. In order to sue someone for securities fraud, you must be able to prove that they made false or misleading statements, and that you relied on those statements to your detriment. Proving fraud can be difficult, and you should talk to a securities lawyer before you decide whether to sue. If you are an investor who suffered losses due to broker misconduct, you have the right to seek reimbursement from the parties responsible. Broker misconduct exists in multiple forms, including: While some forms of broker misconduct are easy to recognize, others are not. A financial advisor who stole funds out of your account and transferred them to a personal account clearly misappropriated your funds and committed misconduct. It’s more difficult to prove that a financial advisor recommended unsuitable investments, however, because the suitability of an investment depends on a number of different factors.  If you suffered investment losses and believe it was a result of broker misconduct, contact a good securities fraud lawyer today to evaluate your case.  Securities Laws are Complex and Numerous The laws that govern the securities industry are complex and numerous. This is partially due to the fact that the securities industry is complex and ever-changing. As new technologies and products are developed, they must be regulated. And as the markets change and evolve, the rules must change with them. This complexity can make it difficult for investors to understand their rights and what they should do if they think their broker has committed securities fraud. Below are just a few of the securities laws that may be relevant to your case: The Securities Act of 1933 Often called the “truth in securities” law, the Securities Act of 1933 has two main objectives: You can read more about the Securities Act of 1933 here. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is often called the “most important securities law in the United States.” It created the SEC and gave it broad authority to regulate the securities industry. Among other things, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires companies that sell securities to the public to disclose important information about their business, financial condition, and management. It also requires brokers and dealers who trade securities to be licensed and to meet other standards of conduct. You can read more about the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 here. Trust Indenture Act of 1939 The Trust Indenture Act of 1939 is a federal law that regulates the sale of municipal securities. Municipal securities are debt obligations issued by states, cities, and other government entities. The Trust Indenture Act of 1939 requires state and local governments to disclose important information about their finances before they sell municipal securities. It also prohibits them from selling municipal securities unless they comply with certain conditions. You can read more about the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 here. Investment Company Act of 1940 The Investment Company Act of...

Continuar leyendo

Jun 17, 2023

¿Qué es el fraude de valores? Definición, ejemplos y cómo denunciar

Securities fraud, which can also be referred to as investment fraud or stock fraud, is the deceptive practice by an individual or group in the securities markets that typically involves a victim (an investor) losing investment capital due to false or misleading information perpetuated by the perpetrator (the fraudster). If you’ve been the victim of securities fraud, you may be able to take legal action. Almost anyone can be a victim of securities fraud. While the elderly and inexperienced investors are frequent targets, even savvy investors can fall prey to securities fraud if they’re not careful. Perpetrators of securities fraud will often make false or misleading statements in order to persuade investors to buy or sell securities, usually at the benefit of the perpetrator. If you believe you have been a victim of securities fraud, it is important to take action. Securities fraud is an illegal or unethical activity punishable by law. You may be able to recover your losses by filing a lawsuit against the person or entity who committed the fraud, as well as protect yourself and other investors from future harm. You should consider talking with an investment fraud lawyer to learn more about your legal options. Key Takeaways Securities Fraud is an illegal and deceptive practice targeting investors to make investment decisions based on false or misleading information. There are many different perpetrators of securities fraud, and almost anyone can be a victim. Commons forms of securities fraud include but are not limited to: High Yield Investment Frauds, Ponzi & Pyramid Schemes, Advance Fee Schemes, Misconduct by an Investment Advisor, and Structured Notes. There are legal actions you can take if you have been the victim of securities fraud, especially if you’ve suffered substantial investment losses as a result. What is Securities Fraud? Securities fraud, also known as investment fraud or stock fraud, involves using false or misleading information to convince investors to make investment decisions that result in substantial losses. All forms of securities fraud aim to deceive investors into taking actions that benefit the perpetrator financially. Need Legal Help? Let’s talk. or, give us a ring at 561-338-0037. The Different Perpetrators of Securities Fraud There are many different perpetrators of securities fraud, and they all have different motivations. Some may be driven by greed, while others may simply be trying to take advantage of investors. Regardless of their motivations, all perpetrators of securities fraud share one goal: to make money by deception. Securities fraud can be committed by a single person, such as a stockbroker or a financial advisor. It might also be perpetrated by an organization, such as a brokerage firm, corporation, or investment bank. In these scenarios, the target is usually an unsophisticated investor who is unaware of the fraud being committed. Independent individuals may also commit securities fraud, such as insider trading or market manipulation. In these cases, the individual investor is usually the perpetrator rather than the victim. Due to the actions of the independent individual, the entire market may be impacted, and other investors may suffer losses as a result. Unfortunately, the perpetrator of securities fraud may be unknown. This is often the case with internet fraud, where scammers set up fake websites or send out mass emails to trick investors into giving them money. Anyone can be a perpetrator of securities fraud, and anyone can be a victim. The best way to protect yourself is to be aware of the different types of securities fraud and to know what red flags to look for. What are Common Examples of Securities Fraud? There are many different types of securities fraud, but some are more common than others. When a broker or investment firm takes your money with the promise of investing it and then uses it for other things, you’ve been a victim of securities fraud. Securities fraud schemes are often characterized by offers of guaranteed returns and low- to no-risk investments. The most typical forms of securities fraud, as defined by the FBI, are: High-Yield Investment Frauds These types of securities fraud are often characterized by promises of high returns on investment with little to no risk. They may involve a few different forms of investments, such as securities, commodities, real estate, or other highly-valuable investments. You can identify these schemes due to their “Too good to be true” offers. These types of fraud tend to be unsolicited. Perpetrators may elicit investments from investors by internet postings, emails, social media, job boards, or even personal contact. They may also use mass marketing techniques to reach a large number of potential investors at once. Once the fraudster has received the investment money, they may simply disappear with it or use it to fund their own lifestyle. The investment itself may not even exist. Ponzi & Pyramid Schemes These types of securities fraud use the money collected from new investors to pay the high rates of return that were promised to earlier investors in the scheme. Payouts over time give the early impression that the scheme is a legitimate investment. However, eventually, there are not enough new investors to support the payouts, and the entire scheme collapses. When this happens, the people who invested at the beginning of the scheme often lose all of their money. In these schemes, the investors were the only source of funding. Advance Fee Schemes In these types of securities fraud, the investor is promised a large sum of money if they pay an upfront fee. The fees may be called “commissions”, “processing fees”, or something similar. The fraudulent organization will often require that the fee be paid in cash, wire transfer, or even cryptocurrency. They may also ask the investor to provide personal information such as bank account numbers or social security numbers. Once the fee is paid, the fraudulent organization will often disappear and the investor will never receive the promised money. Other Securities Fraud In addition to the above list provided by the FBI, at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., we have found that the following types of securities fraud are...

Continuar leyendo

May 29, 2023

William King of Merrill Lynch Resigns Amid Unsuitable Investment Claims

Did William Worthen King Cause You Investment Losses? William W. (Bill) King, a prominent broker at Merrill Lynch, has resigned from the company following a surge in client complaints. King has faced allegations from at least ten customers since August. These individuals voiced their concerns over account mismanagement, specifically citing unsuitable investments and unauthorized trading of options positions. The disputes are currently under review, as reported by BrokerCheck. If you believe you have a claim against William King, you should strongly consider hiring an investment fraud lawyer. Do not wait until it’s too late to file a claim. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., offers free consultations. Give us a call at 800-732-2889. Let’s discuss your case and see what we can do to help you get the compensation you need and deserve. William King Formerly With Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated Has 18 Customer Complaints For Alleged Broker Misconduct Who is William King formerly with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated? William King (CRD #1432593) is a broker and investment advisor who was formerly registered with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated. He is currently a subject under investigation for securities industry sales practice abuse. Investment Losses? Let’s Talk. or, give us a ring at 800-732-2889. William King Customer Complaints William King has been the subject of 18 customer complaints that we know about to recover investment losses. Four of the customer complaints were settled by his employer in favor of the investors. Merrill Lynch denied 5 of the customer complaints.  To date, the customers have not taken any further action. There are 9 other customer complaints made within the last year relating to option transactions that are still pending. A Summary of Recent News Around Merrill Lynch Broker, William W. (Bill) King A well-known Merrill Lynch broker, William W. (Bill) King, who operated from Vero Beach, Florida, and New York, has recently resigned from the firm amid a significant increase in client complaints. Since August, a minimum of ten customers have come forward with grievances, expressing concerns over the mismanagement of their accounts, particularly relating to claims of unsuitable or unauthorized trading of options positions. These disputes are currently pending review, according to information obtained from BrokerCheck. Bill King, boasting an impressive 37-year tenure at Merrill Lynch, made the decision to voluntarily resign on April 21. Recognized for his expertise as an “international” broker, with a specific focus on serving foreign clients, King successfully managed a substantial $1.4 billion in client assets, an achievement acknowledged by Forbes. In fact, Forbes ranked him at #166 on their prestigious list of top wealth advisors in 2022, while also including him in their best-in-state wealth management teams list for this year. Furthermore, King consistently appeared among Barron’s top 1,200 financial advisors from 2018 to 2022, as confirmed by his former team webpage on Merrill’s platform. This recent departure by King aligns with a disconcerting trend observed among several prominent brokers who often secure positions on industry lists, only to later encounter regulatory issues or face client complaints. Notably, King already had six customer disputes on record, covering the period from 1999 to 2014. However, it is worth mentioning that four of those disputes were either resolved without any action or withdrawn. Just because Merrill Lynch rejects your complaint doesn’t mean your claim is invalid. Merrill Lynch has a history of legal action and regulatory scrutiny for investment losses. So, it’s important to know that their rejection doesn’t automatically mean your claim isn’t valid. If you have lost money due to the actions of William King, it’s important that you reach out to an investment loss attorney quickly because the statutes of limitations can bar your claims. Call us at 800-732-2889. Allegations Against William King    A sample of the allegations made in the FINRA reported arbitration claim settlements and/or pending complaints for investment losses are as follows: William King Red Flags & Your Rights As An Investor Of course, William King did not admit to any of the allegations. But regardless of whether an arbitration award was entered, a settlement occurred, or the customer complaint is still pending, the allegations made by customers are red flags which should put all current and former customers of William King at Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated on alert to review carefully the activity and performance of their accounts and question whether William King has engaged in any stockbroker misconduct that may have caused them investment losses. The large number of customer complaints at Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated also raises questions about the brokerage firm’s supervisory practices. If these red flags raise questions, call us and we will inform you of your rights as an investor. Did You Lose Money Because of Broker Misconduct? If you have lost money due to negligence or fraud by a stockbroker or advisor, the easiest way to know if you have a case is to call our office at 800-732-2889. Our investment fraud attorneys will evaluate your claim for free and let you know if we can help you recover your losses. Need Legal Help? Let’s talk. or, give us a ring at 561-338-0037. File A Claim To Recover Your Investment Losses At Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated Due To William King If you have questions about Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated and/or William King and the management or performance of your accounts, please contact Attorney Pearce for a free initial consultation via email or Toll Free at 1-800-732-2889.

Continuar leyendo

May 10, 2023

¿Cuál es la diferencia entre operaciones solicitadas y no solicitadas?

Ideally, hiring a skilled broker takes some of the risk out of investing. Unfortunately, however, some brokers fail to act with the appropriate level of integrity. As an investor, it’s very important to understand the difference between solicited and unsolicited trades. The distinction has significant consequences on your ability to recover losses from a bad trade. What’s the Difference Between a Solicited and an Unsolicited Trade? The main difference between a solicited and unsolicited trade is: a solicited trade is a transaction that the broker recommends to the client. In contrast, an unsolicited transaction is one that the investor initially proposed to the broker. Need Legal Help? Let’s talk. or, give us a ring at 561-338-0037. In regards to solicited trades, the broker is ultimately responsible for the consideration and execution of the trade because he or she brought it to the investor’s attention. The responsibility for unsolicited trades therefore lies primarily with the investor, while the broker merely facilitates the investor’s proposed transaction. Why does the Difference Between an Unsolicited and Socilited Trade Matters? The status of a trade as solicited or unsolicited is hugely important when an investor claims unsuitability. An investor who wants to recover losses may be able to do so if the broker is the one who initially suggests the transaction. Take the following example. You purchase $150,000 of stock in a new company. Shortly after the trade is complete, the stock loses nearly all its original value. As an investor, you will want to recover as much of that loss as possible. One way is to file a claim against your broker on the basis that the stock was an unsuitable investment. When you say that an investment was unsuitable, you are essentially saying that based on the information your broker had about you as an investor, the broker should not have made the trade in the first place. If the stock purchase was at your request—that is, it was unsolicited—then it’s unlikely you’d be able to hold your broker liable for your losses. After all, the trade was originally your idea.  IMPORTANT: If the stock was suggested to you as a good investment by your broker, however, then you may have an argument that you were pushed into a solicited trade that was not in your best interests. If this is the case, you would have a much stronger argument for holding your broker liable. What Is Suitability? The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) imposes rules on registered brokers to protect investors against broker misconduct. Under FINRA Rule 2111, brokers are generally required to engage in trades only if the broker has “a reasonable basis to believe that the recommended transaction or investment strategy involving a security or securities is suitable for the customer.” Whether an investment is suitable depends on diligent consideration of several aspects of a client’s investment profile, including: When a broker makes a trade without a reasonable basis for believing that the trade is suitable, the broker violates FINRA Rule 2111. Investors may then be able to recover losses from the broker, and FINRA may impose sanctions, suspension, or other penalties on the broker. Broker Obligations to Their Clients When a broker conducts a trade on behalf of an investor, the broker uses an order ticket with the details of the trade. Brokers mark these tickets as “solicited” or “unsolicited” to reflect the status of the trade. For the reasons explained above, this marking is very important. On one hand, it protects a broker from unsuitability claims following a trade suggested by the broker’s client. On the other, it provides an avenue to recover losses in the case of a solicited trade that turns out poorly. FINRA Rule 2010 covers properly marking trade tickets. This rule requires brokers to observe “high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade” in their practice. If a broker fails to properly mark a trade ticket, that broker violates Rule 2010. As an investor, you should always receive a confirmation of any trades your broker conducts on your account.  FINRA has found that abuse of authority by mismarking tickets is an issue within the securities industry. The 2018 report found that brokers sometimes mismarked tickets as “unsolicited” to hide trading activity on discretionary accounts. If your broker feels the need to hide a trade from you, that trade is likely unsuitable. How to Protect Yourself Against Trade Ticket Mismarking Whether your account is discretionary or non-discretionary, and whether you’re new to investing or a skilled tycoon, you should always pay close attention to your investment accounts. Carefully review your trade confirmations to make sure that all trades are properly marked. If you find a mistake, immediately report it to your broker or the compliance department of their brokerage firm. It’s their job to correct these mistakes and make sure they don’t happen in the future. Negative or suspicious responses to a legitimate correction request are red flags that should not be ignored. If you discover your broker intentionally mismarking your trade tickets, contact an investment fraud attorney immediately. Can Litigation Finance Help Your Legal Case? Exploring Options for Investment Losses Caused by a Broker Litigation finance can help your legal case by providing financial support for legal fees and expenses. It allows you to pursue your claim without upfront costs and levels the playing field against well-resourced opponents. However, it’s important to carefully consider the costs, choose a reputable provider, and understand the terms of the funding agreement. Concerned About a Solicited Trade? The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., have been helping investors recover losses for over 40 years. We have extensive experience representing investors and have helped our clients recover over $170 million in total. If you’ve become the victim of unsuitable or fraudulent investing, we can help you. Contact us today or give us a call at 561-338-0037 for a free consultation.

Continuar leyendo

Apr 11, 2023

¿Qué son los pagarés estructurados?

Structured notes are a type of investment that can offer higher returns than traditional investments, but they also come with more risks. Structured notes are created by banks and other financial institutions, and they are typically sold to investors through brokerages. The issuer of the note will bundle together different types of securities, such as stocks, bonds, and commodities, and then structure them in a way that offers potential for higher returns. For example, a bank might create a structured note that pays out if the stock market goes up by a certain percentage over the course of the year. The downside of investing in structured notes is that they are complex financial products, which means that investors may not fully understand the risks involved. Additionally, if the underlying securities perform poorly, investors could lose all of their money. In this article, we will cover the following topics: – What are structured notes? – How do structured notes work? – The advantages and disadvantages of investing in structured notes – Legal action you can take if you’ve been sold a structured note If you’re thinking about investing in a structured note, it’s important that you understand how these products work before making a decision. Keep reading to learn more. What are Structured Notes? Structured notes are investments that often combine securities of different asset classes as one investment for the desired risk and return over a period of time. They are complex investments that are often misunderstood by not only investors but the financial advisors who recommend them. Note: The lack of understanding around how these investments actually work and the fees charged to purchase them have resulted in many investors losing a great deal of money. If you find yourself in this situation, you should speak with a securities attorney about your legal options. Types of Structured Notes There are different types of structured notes, but they all have one goal in common: to give the investor a higher return than what they would get from a traditional investment, like a savings account or government bond. Structured notes can be created with different underlying assets, including stocks, bonds, commodities, and even currencies. The most common type of structured note is the principal protected note, which is designed to protect the investor’s original investment while still offering the potential for growth. Other types of structured notes include: How do Structured Notes Work? Structured notes are created by banks and other financial institutions. The issuer of the note will bundle together different types of securities, such as stocks, bonds, and commodities. The way these assets are bundled together will create the desired risk and return for the investor over a period of time. All structured notes have two parts: a bond component and a derivative component. Most of the note is invested in bonds for principal protection, with the rest allocated to a derivative product for upside potential. The derivative product investment allows exposure to any asset class. It’s important to remember that a structured note is a debt obligation. The issuer of the structured note typically pays interest or dividends to the investor, similar to a bond, during the terms of the notes. This makes this type of investment seem safe and secure to many investors. However, there is always the potential for loss with a structured note. Structured notes suffer from a higher degree of interest rate risk, market risk, and liquidity risk than their underlying debt obligations and derivatives. If the issuer of the note defaults, the entire value of the investment could be lost. This means that if the issuing bank were to go bankrupt, investors could lose their entire investment. The Advantages of Investing in Structured Notes The versatility of structured notes allows them to provide a wide range of potentially lucrative outcomes that are difficult to come by elsewhere. Structured notes typically offer investors returns that are higher than the interest rates offered on traditional deposits. They may even offer the potential for capital appreciation. However, such gains or capital gains are subject to the performance of the underlying reference asset(s) or benchmark(s), which exposes investors to a wider range of risks than with a traditional deposit. IMPORTANT: Structured notes are often considered too risky and complicated for the individual investor. Unfortunately, the promise of greater commissions in recent years has prompted stockbrokers to push structured notes on investors, including those for whom they were unsuitable, too dangerous, or just not in line with their objectives. Related Read: Can I Sue My Financial Advisor For Structured Note Investment Losses? The Disadvantages of Investing in Structured Notes Investing in structured notes may not be suitable for everyone. The main reason is that they are complex products that are often misunderstood. A vast majority of structured notes are not principal-guaranteed. You may lose all or a substantial amount of the money you invested in certain situations, including if the reference asset or benchmark performs poorly, interest rates rise, or the issuer of the note defaults as outlined by the terms of the product. The principal repayments or the dividends payable, or both may be linked to the performance of a referenced asset, which is often highly volatile. As a result, if the referenced asset underperforms, you may suffer the loss of dividend payments and/or the loss of your principal investment. In addition, the issuer may have the right to call back, or redeem, the notes early, which could also trigger a loss of your investment. What are the risks? An investor will be exposed to a greater variety of risks when investing in structured notes than when investing in traditional products such as deposits. An investor will lose money if: Although structured notes have the potential to generate greater returns, investors also assume more risks. Investors may find themselves confused by the complex terms and conditions associated with structured notes. To make matters worse, some issuers have been known to market their products aggressively, without adequately disclosing the risks involved. In some cases, investors...

Continuar leyendo

Apr 4, 2023

Broker-Dealer Fraud & Misconduct

This is the ultimate guide to understanding broker-dealer fraud and misconduct for investors. For more than 40 years, the Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. has been helping investors understand brokers, broker-dealers and the rules governing their activities. We understand that brokers and broker-dealers do not always act in the best interests of their customers. As a result, we have devoted our practice to helping investors who have been harmed by unscrupulous or negligent broker-dealers recover their losses through litigation or arbitration proceedings. In this guide, we’ll cover: What is Broker-Dealer Fraud? Broker-dealer fraud occurs when stockbrokers put their own financial interests ahead of their customers, violating their fiduciary duty. This can take many forms, including churning accounts to generate more commissions, misappropriating funds from customer accounts, making unsuitable investment recommendations, or even outright theft. Broker-dealers are held to a high standard of care in their dealings with customers. They must exercise care, skill and diligence when recommending investments, executing trades, and providing advice. When they fail to do so, they can be held liable for any losses suffered by their customers. Sometimes fraud is easy to spot – if a broker-dealer is stealing funds directly from an account, for example. Other times it may be more subtle, such as recommending investments that are not suitable for the customer’s needs or risk tolerance. When investors suffer significant losses due to broker-dealer fraud or misconduct, they may be able to recover damages through a process called FINRA arbitration. In these situations, it is best to consult with a securities attorney to determine the best course of action. What’s the Difference Between Broker-Dealer Fraud and Misconduct? Broker-dealer fraud is the intentional act of causing financial harm to customers by deliberately making false or misleading statements or omissions or engaging in dishonest or unethical practices. On the other hand, broker-dealer misconduct refers to negligence by a stockbroker in failing to meet their responsibilities and obligations as outlined in FINRA rules and regulations. For example, if a broker-dealer provides incorrect information to their customers or fails to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of statements they make, this could be considered misconduct. Similarly, recommending investments that are not suitable for a customer’s needs or risk tolerance can also be considered misconduct. Investment losses due to either fraud or misconduct can be recovered through a FINRA arbitration. What are the Most Common Types of Broker-Dealer Fraud? There is a wide variety of broker-dealer fraud schemes, but there tend to be a few that are more common than others. When a broker-dealer fails to act in the best interest of their client, they may be engaging in one or more of the following practices: High-Yield Investment Frauds High-yield investment frauds are characterized by promises of high returns on investment with little to no risk. These types of fraud can involve several forms of investments, including securities, commodities, real estate, or other highly-valuable investments. You can identify these schemes by their “too good to be true” offers. Perpetrators may elicit investments from investors by internet postings, emails, social media, job boards, or even personal contact. They may also use mass marketing techniques to reach a large number of potential investors at once. Once the fraudster has received the investment money, they may simply disappear with it or use it to fund their own lifestyle. The investment itself may not even exist. Ponzi & Pyramid Schemes Ponzi and pyramid schemes use the money collected from new investors to pay the high rates of return that were promised to earlier investors in the scheme. Payouts over time give the early impression that the scheme is a legitimate investment. However, eventually, there are not enough new investors to support the payouts, and the entire scheme collapses. When this happens, the people who invested at the beginning of the scheme often lose all of their money. In these schemes, the investors were the only source of funding. Other Broker-Dealer Fraud In addition to the above list, at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., we have found that the following types of securities fraud are also common: Misconduct by an Investment Advisor By far the most common type of broker-dealer securities fraud that our firm sees is misconduct by brokers. Brokers are supposed to act in their clients’ best interests (fiduciary duty), but some broker-dealers put their own interests ahead of their clients. For example, a broker-dealer might recommend that a client invests in a certain stock or mutual fund because it will generate a high commission for the broker, not because it is a good investment for the client. Other examples of misconduct by an investment advisor or broker include: Structured Notes Structured notes are investments that often combine securities of different asset classes as one investment for a desired risk and return over a period of time. They are complex investments that are often misunderstood by not only investors but the financial advisors who recommend them. Due to their complexity, it is easy for the terms of the investment to be misrepresented. For example, an advisor might tell their client that a structured note is “risk-free” when, in reality, there is a significant risk of loss. What Actions Can You Take if You Suspect Broker-Dealer Fraud? Broker-dealers must register with FINRA to participate in the securities industry, and FINRA’s arbitration program typically handles disputes between investors and broker-dealers rather than court proceedings. Compared to court proceedings, FINRA arbitration is typically faster, less expensive, and more private. To seek justice for losses due to broker-dealer fraud, filing a claim with FINRA’s arbitration program is recommended. Investors are advised to consult with an attorney to understand their rights and determine if they have a valid claim against the broker-dealer or associated financial professionals. An experienced investment fraud attorney can provide valuable guidance throughout the process. If you’ve lost a significant amount of your investments due to fraudulent broker-dealer activities, don’t hesitate to reach out for help. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., can assess your case and represent you in the FINRA...

Continuar leyendo

Mar 30, 2023

Broker C. Raymond Weldon Investigation & Customer Complaints

C. Raymond Weldon Of Independent Financial Group, LLC And Formerly With The Investment Center, Inc. and Cetera Advisor Networks LLC, Has Six Customer Complaints For Alleged Broker Misconduct. C. Raymond Weldon has been the subject of at least six (6) customer complaints that we know about to recover investment losses. The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. currently represent five of his customers in a FINRA arbitration claim against Weldon’s employers. IMPORTANT: We are providing information about our clients’ allegations and seeking information from other investors who did business with C. Raymond Weldon and had similar investments, a similar investment strategy, and a similar bad experience to help us win our clients’ case. Please contact us online via our contact form or by giving us a ring at (800) 732-2889. Raymond Weldon Customer Complaints Weldon has been the subject of at least six (6) customer complaints that we know about to recover investment losses. We currently represent five of his customers against Weldon’s employers. A summary of the allegations made in the FINRA arbitration filed for investment losses realized by five of Weldon’s clients were as follows: 1. Introduction Claimants filed an arbitration claim against Respondents Cetera Advisors Networks, LLC (“CAN”), The Investment center, Inc. (“TIC”), and (“IFG”) for their registered representative C. Raymond Weldon (“Weldon”) failure to act in Claimants’ “best interest,” and his unsuitable recommendations, misrepresentations, misleading statements, acts, and omissions. Weldon had written discretionary authority to manage Claimants’ accounts and failed to do so. Respondents CAN and TIC formerly employed and IFG who currently employs Weldon held him out and other employees on his team as stockbrokers, investment advisers, investment managers, financial advisers, and financial planners with special skills and expertise in the management of securities portfolios and financial, estate, retirement, and tax planning matters. Weldon was a Chartered Financial Consultant, a professional with a certification which would indicate Respondents and Weldon knew or should have known his mismanagement Claimants’ accounts was in breach of his fiduciary duties and below the acceptable standard of care of professionals like him.  2. THE RELEVANT FACTS All Claimants, except one Claimant’s wife, worked together. They were introduced to Weldon as an investment manager who successfully managed securities brokerage accounts for a local synagogue and many of its members. With one limited exception, none of the Claimants had any securities brokerage accounts or experience investing in the stock or bond markets before they met Weldon. They were all interested in saving for retirement and he solicited them to establish an investment advisory and brokerage relationship for that purpose. Claimants Richard, Anthony, Alex, Chris, and, later on, Jessica, opened small, unleveraged, and well diversified mutual fund investment accounts, which Weldon managed for a fee on an annualized basis (the “ProFunds Accounts”). The Cetera Advisor Networks, LLC (“CAN”) Accounts In or about October 2020, Weldon boasted about his performance in managing the ProFunds Accounts and introduced them to another type of customized stock brokerage account he managed for synagogue members. He encouraged Claimants to open additional accounts with him to invest in the stock market for their retirement (the “CAN Accounts”). Weldon met with Claimants and showed them documents related to his performance managing other clients’ accounts. He spoke with the other Claimants over the telephone about his performance record. He provided little detail about his management style other than he had a “track record” for substantially growing the assets deposited in his clients’ securities brokerage accounts and preserving assets for their retirement. Weldon claimed that his pro-active management style allowed him to maximize growth in the up markets and minimize losses in down markets. There was no discussion with them about the true nature, mechanics, or risks of the highly leveraged and overly concentrated investment strategy he deployed in the technology sector of the stock market.  The individual Claimants gathered assets from savings, bonuses, and/or refinanced real estate to open and deposit cash in their CAN Accounts. They each deposited substantial amount of money in each of their accounts in December of that year and the following year for Weldon to manage for their retirement. The Claimants’ employer was the last to open an account and deposit funds it had reserved for working capital in January 2021. Weldon prepared and all the Claimants signed management agreements and gave Weldon the authority to manage their accounts on margin without any prior consultation about the investments being made or strategy deployed and paid him a management fee to do so. Claimants did not realize Weldon’s papers also allowed Respondents to get paid commissions on each transaction in their accounts. Weldon also prepared and completed new account opening documents and agreements for managed accounts with false and/or misleading information to suit his strategy and his own “best interest,” as opposed to Claimants. For example, he wrote that one Claimant that was a construction company had over 20 years’ experience investing in stocks, bonds, and mutual funds when he knew it did not even exist until 2013 and never had any securities brokerage accounts. Further, Weldon knew that the company was depositing working capital which needed to be conservatively invested in non-volatile liquid investments and yet he falsely identified the company’s investment objective as “aggressive growth” and risk tolerance as “significant” meaning “an investor who seeks maximum return and accepts the risk of significant volatility and decreases in the value of a portfolio.” According to Weldon, the company had no need for liquidity, which was untrue. These were not clerical errors; rather, they were intentional mischaracterizations by Weldon to slip under the Compliance Department’s radar and manage the accounts in a speculative manner against Claimants’ instructions.  Weldon regularly encouraged Claimants to bring in more money for him to manage. Why? Because it was in his “best interest,” not the Claimants. The greater the total account market value, the greater the management fees which were based upon assets under management. The more money Claimants deposited, the more transactions and more commissions, Respondents and he received, in addition...

Continuar leyendo