Our firm is investigating Raymond James financial advisor and stockbroker Christopher William Campbell (CRD# 5597534) of Buffalo, New York for potential investment-related misconduct.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
Based on publicly available registration and employment history, Christopher William Campbell has been registered with Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. since November 2017 and Raymond James Financial Services Advisors, Inc. since November 2017, working out of the firm’s Buffalo, New York office.
Prior to Raymond James, Mr. Campbell was registered with Waddell & Reed from approximately May 2016 through November 2017.
Christopher William Campbell Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck reflects two pending customer disputes involving allegations that customers were induced to invest in a real estate investment based on alleged misrepresentations, with claimed damages of approximately $282,434.75 and $282,537.50.
Customer Dispute 1: Alleged Misrepresentations About a Real Estate Investment (FINRA Case No. 25-01503)
- Allegation: Claimants allege they invested in a real estate investment based on the financial advisor’s alleged misrepresentations.
- Product type: Direct Investment (DPP & LP Interests).
- Alleged damages: $282,434.75.
- Status: Arbitration pending (FINRA), Case No. 25-01503; notice/process served 08/12/2025.
- Related civil litigation (reported as pending): Superior Court of California, South Division (Los Angeles), Case No. 24LBCV02340; notice/process served 11/14/2024 (broker statement indicates the litigation is stayed and the customer elected arbitration).
Customer Dispute 2: Alleged Misrepresentations About a Real Estate Investment (FINRA Case No. 25-01502)
- Allegation: Claimants allege they invested in a real estate investment based on the financial advisor’s alleged misrepresentations.
- Product type: Direct Investment (DPP & LP Interests).
- Alleged damages: $282,537.50.
- Status: Arbitration pending (FINRA), Case No. 25-01502; notice/process served 08/12/2025.
- Related civil litigation (reported as pending): Superior Court of California, South Division (Los Angeles), Case No. 24LBCV02342; notice/process served 11/14/2024 (broker statement indicates the litigation is stayed and the customer elected arbitration).
Disclosures (for quick reference):
- Action: Customer Dispute (FINRA arbitration) — Case #25-01503; Alleged damages: $282,434.75; Disposition/Status: Pending.
- Action: Customer Dispute (FINRA arbitration) — Case #25-01502; Alleged damages: $282,537.50; Disposition/Status: Pending.
- Action: Civil litigation (Superior Court of California, Los Angeles) — Case #24LBCV02340; Disposition/Status: Pending/stayed per broker statement.
- Action: Civil litigation (Superior Court of California, Los Angeles) — Case #24LBCV02342; Disposition/Status: Pending/stayed per broker statement.
To obtain a copy of Christopher William Campbell’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability) matters here because alleged “misrepresentations” often go hand-in-hand with a suitability failure: a recommendation can only be suitable if the advisor has a reasonable basis to believe the investment fits the customer’s objectives, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, and time horizon, and that the customer actually understood the investment’s key risks. When a customer alleges they were steered into a real-estate direct investment (such as DPP/LP interests) based on incorrect or incomplete information, suitability analysis typically focuses on whether the advisor performed reasonable diligence and matched the product’s risk/illiquidity profile to the investor before recommending it.
FINRA Rule 2010 (Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade) is commonly implicated by allegations of misrepresentation because the rule broadly requires brokers to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. In practice, if an advisor is accused of presenting a real-estate investment with misleading statements or omissions—especially where investors claim significant damages—Rule 2010 is often evaluated alongside the underlying facts to determine whether the conduct fell below those standards, even if the dispute is still pending.
FINRA Rule 2210 (Communications with the Public) can be relevant in misrepresentation cases because it governs how brokers communicate with customers, including requirements that communications be fair and balanced and not omit material information that would make what is stated misleading. Where investors allege they invested due to an advisor’s alleged misrepresentations, the case frequently turns on what was communicated (emails, presentations, pitch materials, and conversations), whether risks and limitations were clearly disclosed, and whether the overall message created a misleading impression about the real-estate investment.
The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A. is a nationally recognized securities law firm representing investors in FINRA arbitration and securities fraud cases on a contingency fee basis. Robert Wayne Pearce, the founding attorney, has more than 45 years of experience recovering millions for victims of broker misconduct and investment fraud. He previously defended major brokerage firms and now uses that insight to protect investors nationwide. To discuss your case directly with Mr. Pearce, call (800) 732-2889 or email pearce@rwpearce.com for a free consultation.
