Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“Raymond James”) (CRD# 6694) is a registered broker-dealer headquartered in St. Petersburg, Florida.
Raymond James’ current BrokerCheck report lists 128 regulatory events and 76 FINRA arbitration awards. The firm is currently active, is registered with the SEC, FINRA, and 53 U.S. states and territories, and is not presently suspended by a regulator.
The firm’s disclosed regulatory history includes matters involving customer-complaint reporting, mutual-fund supervision, unreasonable commissions, 529 plan share classes, unit investment trusts, advisory-account fees, anti-money-laundering controls, electronic communications, and other supervisory deficiencies.
Investors who suffered losses because of unsuitable recommendations, excessive commissions, unauthorized trading, misrepresentations, excessive fees, or supervisory failures may wish to consult an experienced investment fraud lawyer about their potential recovery options.
Can I Sue Raymond James Financial Services Inc.?
A potential Raymond James claim generally begins with an investigation of the investor’s accounts, financial circumstances, communications, and the recommendations made by the financial professional.
Relevant evidence may include:
- Monthly and quarterly account statements;
- Trade confirmations;
- New-account and customer-profile forms;
- Emails, text messages, and correspondence;
- Investment-advisory agreements;
- Records of commissions and advisory fees;
- Mutual-fund and 529 plan documents;
- Unit investment trust confirmations;
- Variable-annuity contracts and exchange forms;
- Wire-transfer and withdrawal records;
- Notes concerning the investor’s objectives and risk tolerance; and
- Communications with Raymond James’ compliance personnel.
Most brokerage-account disputes are pursued through FINRA arbitration rather than traditional court litigation. An experienced FINRA arbitration lawyer can investigate the account activity, identify potentially responsible parties, calculate recoverable damages, prepare the Statement of Claim, and represent the investor through discovery, mediation, settlement negotiations, and the arbitration hearing.
How to Sue Raymond James for Investment Losses
What Can I Do If I Lost Money at Raymond James?
An investment loss does not automatically establish liability. Securities may decline because of market conditions, issuer performance, interest-rate changes, and disclosed investment risks.
A viable investor claim generally requires evidence that an unsuitable recommendation, material misrepresentation, unauthorized transaction, negligent act, excessive fee, or other breach of duty caused or contributed to the loss.
Potential Raymond James claims may involve:
- Unsuitable investment recommendations;
- Unauthorized trading;
- Churning or excessive trading;
- Fraud or material misrepresentations;
- Excessive commissions or advisory fees;
- Inappropriate mutual-fund share classes;
- Unit investment trust rollovers;
- Unsuitable 529 plan investments;
- Variable-annuity exchanges;
- Concentrated or overleveraged accounts;
- Failure to apply available sales-charge discounts;
- Misappropriation or unauthorized withdrawals;
- Negligence or breach of fiduciary duty; or
- Brokerage-firm failure to supervise.
Investors should preserve their records and seek legal advice promptly. FINRA’s arbitration eligibility rule and separate state or federal limitation periods may restrict the time available to pursue a claim.
Learn more about FINRA arbitration deadlines and statutes of limitation.
What is Raymond James Financial Services Inc.?
The company was founded in 1968 and has been engaged in its broker-dealer and investment advisory businesses. The genesis of Raymond James (CRD # 6694) was in the early 1960s. Since then there have been several name changes and restructuring of the company. It is now headquartered in St. Petersburg, Florida, and operates a full service broker-dealer and investment advisory firm with multiple subsidiaries providing different financial services.
Its independent broker-dealer arm has grown through acquisition and organic development of primarily one and two person registered representative offices supervised remotely. Today there are over 3000 Raymond James branch offices with over 7600 registered representatives in every state. It is now one of the largest broker-dealer and investment advisory firms in the United States.
Raymond James In Trouble – Latest News
Yes, Raymond James has faced significant regulatory problems in 2024, particularly with a major FINRA enforcement action. In August 2024, Raymond James agreed to pay nearly $2 million to settle FINRA allegations that it failed to reasonably supervise the timely reporting of customer complaints and failed to properly monitor at least 4.7 million mutual fund purchases between 2012 and 2017.
The firm’s employee and independent broker units failed to timely report “any” written customer complaints, despite receiving “numerous” allegations of “forgery, theft, or misappropriation of funds or securities,” according to FINRA. The settlement involved Raymond James & Associates paying a $525,000 fine plus over $26,000 in restitution, while Raymond James Financial Services paid a $1.3 million fine and more than $85,500 in restitution to 40 customers.
Additionally, in December 2024, Raymond James faced a lawsuit alleging it failed to warn investors about a Florida advisor in a termination filing. The firm has also faced allegations of charging clients with advisory accounts unreasonable commission fees.
Why Does Raymond James Have So Many Bad Reviews and Customer Complaints?
Raymond James has so many complaints primarily because of its independent broker-dealer business model, which creates gaps in supervision that leave investors vulnerable to misconduct. Unlike traditional brokerage firms with on-site managers and compliance officers at each branch, Raymond James operates a franchise-style system where independent contractors run their own offices with minimal day-to-day oversight.
The typical structure involves remote supervisors at Offices of Supervisory Jurisdiction (OSJs) who monitor multiple branch offices from a distance while also running their own businesses. These supervisors are not full-time compliance personnel, so they cannot review new accounts, securities transactions, or client correspondence as they happen. This means problems like forgeries, inaccurate customer information, and unsuitable recommendations can go undetected for extended periods.
Because Raymond James representatives often operate as separately incorporated businesses rather than direct employees, the firm has less control over their daily activities. Many offices receive only one compliance audit per year. The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) has documented that independent broker-dealers like Raymond James experience more instances of sales abuse and investor losses than traditional firms with hands-on branch supervision.
Examples of Regulatory Problems and Complaints for Raymond James Financial Services Inc.
Raymond James’ rapid growth has not been without consequences. There have been approximately 83 Federal, state and self-regulatory body disclosure events; that is, final and formal proceedings initiated by a regulatory authority (e.g., a state or federal securities agency like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or self-regulatory body like the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA)) for a violation(s) of investment-related rules or regulations. Over the years, there have been hundreds, if not, thousands of customer complaints filed against Raymond James for misconduct by its securities sales and investment advisory representatives that are not reported by the firm on its Central Depository Record.
We have reported and written about these regulatory problems and customer complaints over many years. Raymond James is a repeat offender: there are over 23 SEC and FINRA reported disciplinary proceedings citing the firm with one form of supervisory lapses or another in the last decade. The other 60 disciplinary proceedings were filed by state securities regulators throughout the United States.
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS AND REGULATORY PROBLEMS RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL SERVICES HAS FACED OVER THE YEARS*
Raymond James has been repeatedly censured, warned, and fined millions for its own misconduct and failure to supervise its army of financial advisors.* A few of the notable FINRA Sanctions for its Supervisory Failures are below:
FINRA Sanctions Raymond James Over $8 million For Not Supervising 529 Plan Mutual Fund Share-Class Recommendations
During the relevant period, FINRA found that Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (“RJA”) and Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”) each failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, and failed to establish, maintain and enforce written supervisory procedures, reasonably designed to supervise representatives’ share-class recommendations to customers of 529 savings plans, in violation of MSRB Rule G-27(a), (b), and (c).
RJA and RJFS have agreed to pay restitution relating to the sale of Class C shares to certain 529 plan customers on the terms specified below. RJA has agreed to pay restitution in the estimated amount of $3,828,304 and RJFS has agreed to pay restitution in the estimated amount of $4,203,182, for an aggregate restitution payment of approximately $8,031,486.
Raymond James Sanctioned By FINRA For Cheating Charitable Organizations Out Of Sales Charge Discounts
FINRA investigated and found that Raymond James disadvantaged certain retirement plan and charitable organization customers that were eligible to purchase Class A shares in certain mutual funds without a front-end sales charge (“Eligible Customers”) but were instead sold Class A shares with a front-end sales charge or Class B or C shares with back-end sales charges and higher ongoing fees and expenses. During the Relevant Period, FINRA also found that Raymond James failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that Eligible Customers who purchased mutual fund shares received the benefit of applicable sales charge waivers.
As a result, FINRA concluded that, Raymond James violated NASD Conduct Rule 3010 and FINRA Rules 3110 and 2010 and imposed sanctions, including a censure and order that Raymond James pay restitution to the customers in the total amount of $4,209,583.44.
Raymond James Fined $17 Million By FINRA For Lax Compliance Systems And Procedures
During the relevant period, FINRA found that the 2 affiliated broker-dealers, Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (“RJA”) and Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”), did not dedicate sufficient resources to compliance and supervisory systems and procedures to match their firms’ growth. As a result, RJA and RJFS allowed certain red flags of potentially suspicious activity to go undetected or inadequately investigated. In addition to its AML deficiencies, both RJA and RJFS failed to establish, maintain and enforce a supervisory system reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) for transactions involving large blocks of low-priced securities. Finally, RJFS failed to establish and maintain reasonable written supervisory procedures with respect to its review of variable annuity exchange transactions and suitability reviews. For these failures, FINRA censured RJA and fined it $8 million. FINRA separately censured RJFS and fined that firm $9 million.
Raymond James Fined By FINRA $2 Million For Not Reviewing Emails
FINRA investigated and found that Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”) did not have supervisory systems and procedures for reviewing email communications that were reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable legal requirements or appropriate for the firm’s business, size, structure, and customers. As a result, RJFS violated NASD Rules 3010 and 2110 and FINRA Rules 3110 and 2010 and was censured and fined $2 million.
Raymond James Sanctioned By FINRA For Charging Unfair Commissions
FINRA investigated and found that Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”), failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to achieve compliance with NASD Conduct Rule 2440 (Fair Prices and Commissions), resulting in customers being charged unfair and unreasonable commissions on equity transactions, in violation of NASD Conduct Rules 2440, 3010 and 2110, FINRA Rule 2010 and NASD IM-2440-1 for which the firm was censured and fined $200,000 and ordered to pay restitution of approximately $800,000 for a total of approximately $1 million in sanctions.
Raymond James Sanctioned By FINRA For Ignoring Ponzi Scheme
FINRA investigated and found that Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”), failed to implement procedures that were reasonably designed to detect and cause the reporting of suspicious transactions in the accounts of its customer who used his brokerage accounts at RJFS to conduct a Ponzi scheme that resulted in losses of approximately $17.8 million to the individuals who provided funds to him.
During the relevant period, RJFS became aware of numerous red flags suggesting that 1 of its customers may have been engaged in suspicious or illegal activity. However, RJFS failed to adequately consider or review many of these red flags in light of its Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) obligations. In many instances, the information about the red flags was not provided to the firm’s AML Officer for consideration and evaluation. After RJFS became aware of a suspicious flow of funds in and out of JR’s accounts, it still failed to conduct adequate due diligence or monitoring of JR’s accounts.
By failing to implement policies and procedures that were reasonably designed to detect and cause the reporting of suspicious transactions in the accounts of JR, RJFS violated NASD Rule 3011(a), and, by virtue of that violation, NASD Rule 2110 for which FINRA censured and fined the company $400,000.
Raymond James Fined $2.75 Million For Lax Supervision Of Branch Managers
FINRA investigated and found that Securities America failed to have a supervisory system, including written procedures, in place regarding electronic communications with customers that was reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable federal securities laws and regulations and with applicable FINRA and NASD Rules. Specifically, FINRA found that Securities America’s email monitoring system did not identify numerous emails sent to FINRA in connection with an investigation of inappropriate conduct of one of Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”) registered branch managers, discovered deficiencies in the firm’s supervisory system and written supervisory procedures (WSPs). During the relevant period, FINRA found that the supervision of over 1,100 producing Branch Office Managers (branch managers) was the responsibility of only three sales managers, in cooperation with the RJFS Compliance Department. The Compliance Department relied primarily on exception report review and branch audits. Many of the activities commonly associated with daily supervision, however, were being conducted by the branch managers themselves, a classic case of the “Fox Guarding The Henhouse.” This was a serious deficiency and yet FINRA only censured RJFS and fined the firm $2.75 million.
Raymond James Sanctioned By FINRA For Not Supervising Fee-Based Accounts
During the relevant period, FINRA found that Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (“RJA”) and Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”) each failed to establish and maintain a supervisory system, and failed to establish, maintain and enforce written supervisory procedures, reasonably designed to supervise representatives’ opening of a fee-based brokerage accounts.
During the relevant period, a period of rapid growth in the firms’ fee-based brokerage business, RJA and RJFS continued to utilize existing procedures for review of account opening documents and account transactions, and did not establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written procedures, specifically designed to review and monitor their fee-based business. In its investigation, FINRA discovered the 2 firms had never conducted an initial or periodic supervisory review of their customers fee-based brokerage accounts to determine whether such accounts were appropriate for the particular customers. RJA and RJFS also have never monitored their fee-based brokerage accounts for inactivity. As a result, RJA and RJFS violated NASD Conduct Rules 3010 and 2110.
In addition, the firms failed to provide their brokers with any criteria or guidance to determine whether a fee-based brokerage account was even appropriate for a customer and did not require their brokers to determine whether a Passport Brokerage or Ambassador account was appropriate for a customer before opening any of those type of fee-based accounts. In addition, RJA and RJFS marketed Passport Brokerage accounts through the use of sales literature that failed to comply with NASD’s Advertising Rules. Accordingly, these communications with the public violated NASD Conduct Rules 2210(d) and 2110. As a result of all these violations, the 2 firms was censured and fined $750,000 and ordered to pay restitution to customers who were charged fees for these accounts when they should not have been opened in the first place.
SEC Sanctions Raymond James Over $15 Million For Sales Practice Violations
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) investigated and discovered Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (“RJA”) and Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. (“RJFS”) engaged in several violations during the relevant period.
In particular, RJA and RJFS financial advisors (collectively “RJ Advisers”) failed to conduct promised suitability reviews for certain advisory accounts, did not adopt policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations concerning the suitability of fee-based advisory accounts, and overvalued certain assets that resulted in charging excess advisory fees; and RJA and RJFS (collectively “RJ Brokers”) failed to have a reasonable basis for recommending certain unit investment trust (“UIT”) transactions to brokerage customers, and failed to disclose the conflict of interest associated with earning greater compensation when recommending certain securities without providing applicable sales-load discounts to brokerage customers. These failures involved products sold and services provided to retail investors.
The SEC also found RJ Advisers’ Form ADV Part 2A brochures (“brochures”) and compliance policies and procedures provided that they would conduct reviews at specified intervals to determine if advisory accounts remained suitable for clients or if the clients’ assets should be moved to a brokerage account. RJ Advisers, however, failed to timely and adequately conduct these reviews and discover that they were 7708 advisory accounts that had no securities trading activity for at least 12 months when the RJ Advisers were paid over $4.9 million in advisory fees.
The SEC also found Raymond James engaged in additional violations that affected both brokerage customers and advisory clients who owned UITs. In particular, the stockbrokers: (1) did not have a reasonable basis for recommending that certain brokerage customers sell certain UIT positions prior to their maturity dates and then repurchase newly-issued UIT positions, which generated approximately $5.5 million in excess sales charges and affected 2,044 brokerage accounts; and (2) failed to disclose their conflict of interest by recommending UITs without applying almost $660,000 in applicable sales-load discounts to brokerage customers in 5,468 eligible accounts, for which RJ Brokers received greater compensation. In addition, RJ Advisers used incorrect UIT valuations to calculate management fees for certain advisory clients, resulting in approximately $51,000 in excess advisory fees.
The SEC, unlike FINRA, did not take these violations lightly and ordered the brokerage and investment advisory firms to cease-and-desist from any further violations of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, censured, ordered them to pay in excess of $15 million in disgorgement of fees and commissions with interest, and civil monetary penalties.
*Above are only some of the regulatory disciplinary actions filed against Raymond James by FINRA. NASSA and other state securities regulator investigations and enforcement actions account for another 72 BrokerCheck disclosures.
How to File an Official Complaint Against Raymond James Financial Services Inc. or one of its brokers with FINRA
If you suffered losses because a Raymond James Financial Services Inc. (CRD #6694) broker made unsuitable recommendations, misrepresented risks, or your accounts were mishandled, you’re not alone—and you have options. Raymond James has faced repeated FINRA and SEC actions for supervisory failures, complaint-reporting lapses, and transaction-monitoring breakdowns across its employee and independent channels. Those patterns matter when you file: they help frame your claim around negligence, failure to supervise, breach of fiduciary duty, and other violations that FINRA arbitrators take seriously.
At the Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., our securities lawyers have extensive experience holding firms like Raymond James accountable through FINRA complaints and arbitration. We know how to position your evidence, navigate the FINRA process, and pursue restitution for excessive fees, improper commissions, unsuitable trades, misleading statements, and other misconduct. Before you contact the firm or its insurer, talk to us—we’ll explain your rights and the most effective way to file a FINRA complaint against Raymond James or one of its brokers.
These cases can be extremely complex, and so having the support of a reputable attorney who is experienced in recovering investment losses for investors is key to your success. Many customers make the mistake of contacting Raymond James without representation with an attorney about their complaints and have their complaints denied.
How The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. Can Help You Recover Losses at Raymond James
The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. assists investors in navigating every step of the FINRA complaint and arbitration process against Raymond James. From the initial case evaluation through the final arbitration hearing, our team handles the complex procedural requirements, evidence gathering, and legal strategy needed to pursue maximum recovery.
With over 45 years of experience in securities arbitration, Attorney Robert Wayne Pearce has recovered more than $175 million for investors who suffered losses due to broker misconduct and firm negligence. Our firm has handled numerous Raymond James cases and understands the specific supervisory failures and compliance breakdowns that characterize this firm’s regulatory history.
Attorney Pearce offers free consultations to evaluate your potential claim. During this consultation, we will review your account statements, discuss the circumstances of your losses, and provide an honest assessment of your legal options. Contact us today to discuss your Raymond James investment losses.
Investment Losses? We Can Help
Discuss your legal options with an attorney at The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A.
or, give us a ring at (800) 732-2889.
Consult With An Attorney Who Recovers Investment Losses Caused By Raymond James Financial Services Today
For more than 45 years, Robert Wayne Pearce has represented investors seeking to recover losses caused by broker misconduct, unsuitable recommendations, negligence, investment fraud, excessive fees, and supervisory failures.
The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. represents investors nationwide, including clients seeking assistance from a Florida investment fraud lawyer, a Virginia investment fraud lawyer, or a Kansas investment fraud lawyer. Florida is the firm’s headquarters state, while Virginia and Kansas participated in the recent unreasonable-commission regulatory proceedings.
The firm generally handles qualifying investor-loss claims on a contingency-fee basis. Clients ordinarily do not pay an attorney’s fee unless the firm recovers compensation for them.
Call (866) 951-4278 for a free and confidential consultation.
