Our firm is investigating Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. financial advisor and stockbroker Anthony D’Ascoli (CRD# 4133420) of Delray Beach, Florida for potential investment-related misconduct.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
According to his FINRA BrokerCheck report, Anthony D’Ascoli has been registered with Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. since September 2013 (Delray Beach, Florida). Prior to Oppenheimer, his registration history includes UBS Financial Services Inc. (June 2009 to July 2013) and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (approximately April 2000/March 2001 through June 2009).
Anthony D’Ascoli Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck reflects three customer disputes reported for Mr. D’Ascoli. Below is a summary of the dispute allegations and outcomes as reported.
Disclosure summary (for context)
- Customer Dispute (FINRA arbitration) — Settled: Allegations of unsuitable investments (equities/ETFs) and related claims; settled for $70,000 (no individual contribution reported).
- Customer Dispute — Settled: Allegation of unauthorized trading involving listed equities; settlement amount reported as $34,773.15 (no individual contribution reported).
- Customer Complaint — Denied: Allegations that options investments were “risky and irresponsible,” with one investment identified on 11/18/2021; alleged damages $198,480; complaint denied.
Allegation 1: Unsuitable investments (Equities/ETFs) — FINRA arbitration (Settled)
A customer alleged losses due to unsuitable investments and asserted claims including breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract, with the activity timeframe reported as 7/1/2021–9/20/2022. The products were reported as listed equities and “ETF & Omega.” The matter was filed in FINRA arbitration (Case No. 23-00366) on 02/14/2023 and later settled on 02/21/2024 for $70,000, with $0 listed as the broker’s individual contribution amount.
Allegation 2: Unauthorized trading — Customer dispute (Settled)
A customer alleged unauthorized trading involving listed equities, with alleged damages of $34,773.15. The complaint was received on 03/12/2009 and reported as settled with a status date of 03/16/2009; the report reflects $34,773.15 as the settlement amount and $0 as the individual contribution amount. The broker statement in the report describes “discretionary tax-loss selling” in a third-party discretionary account and indicates the firm corrected the trades.
Allegation 3: Options characterized as “risky and irresponsible” — Customer complaint (Denied)
A customer alleged investments were “risky and irresponsible” and identified one specific investment on 11/18/2021, involving options, with alleged damages of $198,480. The complaint was received on 01/31/2023 and was denied (status date 03/27/2023).
To obtain a copy of Anthony D’Ascoli’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability) requires a broker to have a reasonable basis to believe a recommendation is suitable for a customer based on the customer’s investment profile (e.g., objectives, risk tolerance, financial situation). In complaints alleging unsuitable investments—such as the dispute referencing equities/ETFs during 7/1/2021–9/20/2022—the suitability rule is often central to evaluating whether the recommendations matched the customer’s stated goals and risk capacity.
FINRA Rule 3260 (Discretionary Accounts) governs trading in customer accounts where the representative exercises discretion, including limitations and conditions under which discretionary authority may be used. Allegations framed as unauthorized trading can implicate discretionary-trading issues—particularly where trades occur “without confirmation” on timing or authority—because brokers generally must have proper authorization for discretionary activity and must adhere to firm and regulatory requirements around customer consent and oversight.
FINRA Rule 2010 (Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade) is a broad ethical rule requiring high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. In disputes alleging risky and irresponsible options activity (including the complaint identifying an options transaction on 11/18/2021 and alleging $198,480 in damages), Rule 2010 is commonly analyzed alongside more specific rules because the core question is whether the broker’s conduct met baseline standards of fairness, diligence, and ethical practice.
For over 45 years, Robert Wayne Pearce has helped investors recover losses caused by broker fraud, negligence, and unsuitable recommendations. His firm, The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., represents clients nationwide on a no-recovery, no-fee basis. Call (800) 732-2889 or email pearce@rwpearce.com for a free case review with an experienced securities attorney.
