Securities Lawyer Blog | Victim of Fraud?

TAG | auction rate securities

Feb/13

18

Morgan Keegan Auction-Rate Securities Bought Back in Suit Brought by SEC

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Morgan Keegan & Co. was ordered to buy back auction-rate securities (ARS) and pay $110,500 in a case in which it was accused by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of misleading customers about the risks of the investments we learn in an article from Bloomberg.

The U.S. District Judge William Duffey Jr. in Atlanta ruled yesterday that some of the company’s brokers misrepresented and omitted important information when selling the securities. The judge said the brokerage didn’t act fraudulently, ruling against the SEC on part of its case.

“Brokers apparently were lulled into describing it too broadly and neglected in their discussions with the customers discussed in this order to discuss the practical and technical requirements of an auction and the consequences of an auction failure,” the judge said in his order, referring to the auction-rate securities market.

“As a result, the evidence in this case was that the Morgan Keegan brokers discussed in this order neglected to fully inform investors of the ARS risk when marketing the ARS product, to include informing them of the risk of auction failures, the concomitant loss of liquidity, and varying interest rates,” Duffey said.

The opinion followed a non-jury trial held in November in which the SEC tried to show that the company, now owned by Raymond James Financial Inc., told clients that the more than $2 billion in securities it sold had “zero risk,” even as the market was collapsing in late 2007 and 2008.

Morgan Keegan voluntarily bought back about $2 billion in auction-rate securities from customers before the lawsuit, it said in court filings. The judge ordered that the company buy back some securities from some affected customers.

If you or a loved one purchased auction rate securities from Morgan Keegan & Co., now owned by Raymond James Financial, Inc., call Soreide Law Group, and speak to a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to recover your losses. To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com.

· · · · · · · · · ·

Mar/12

14

Finra’s Top Enforcement Actions

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

In an article from InvestmentNews.com, we learn that enforcement actions and fines by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc., or Finra,  jumped sharply in 2011, with the latter rising to $68 million, from $45 million in 2010, a new study shows. Much of that surge came from penalties for improper advertising.
Finra filed 1,488 disciplinary actions in 2011, up from 1,310 cases in 2010, according to the annual Finra sanctions survey released on Monday. The number of brokers barred by Finra rose to 329 in 2011, from 288 in 2010. Here are eight top areas of enforcement, ranked by total fines.

1. Advertising

Finra Fines: $21.Million
Details: Sanctions involving advertising jumped from $4.75 million in 2010 to $21.1 million in 2011. The number of cases doubled in number to 45 in 2011. As in 2009 and 2010, a significant amount of the 2011 advertising fines ($9.5 million) related to the sale of ARS. In addition, nearly $8 million in fines stemmed from nine cases involving the use of allegedly misleading advertising materials on firm websites available to investors. This included advertisements for complex products and more traditional investments like annuities.

2. Short selling

Finra Fines: $16.8 million
Details: Short-selling cases generated $16.8 million in fines in 2011. In contrast, short selling was fifth on Sutherland’s list last year. The $16,8 million was a more than fourfold increase compared with the fines reported in 2010. This large increase was largely driven by a single $12 million fine imposed on a firm that allegedly violated Regulation SHO by failing to properly supervise millions of short sale orders that were mismarked and placed to the market without reasonable grounds to believe that the securities could be borrowed.

3. Auction rate securities

Finra Fines: $10 million
Details: ARS continued to be an important focus for Finra in 2011, as seven ARS cases resulted in nearly $10 million in fines. This was a substantial increase from 2010 when two ARS cases were reported that resulted in $1.75 million in total fines. Most of the 2011 cases concerned the alleged failure to disclose material facts to investors, often in advertising materials

4. Suitability

Finra Fines: $7.7 million
Details: Such cases led to $7.7 million in reported fines in 2011. The 106 cases that involved suitability in 2011 doubled the cases reported in 2009 and 2010. Similarly, the fines reported in suitability cases jumped from $3.75 million in 2010 to $7.7 million in 2011. Suitability has repeatedly landed on Sutherland’s list, placing fourth in 2010 and 2011 and second in 2008 and 2009.

5. Improper forms

Finra Fines: $6.6 million
Details:U4, U5, and Rule 3070 filings resulted in 91 Finra disciplinary actions and more than $6.6 million in reported fines in 2011 (compared to 67 cases and fines of $1.45 million in 2010). Although allegations concerning isolated problems with these regulatory filings often led to fines of $5,000 to $10,000, there were four 2011 cases where each firm was fined more than $600,000 for failing to report material information on Forms U4 and U5, including SEC investigations and customer settlements.

6. Mutual funds

Finra Fines: $5.1 million
Details: After yielding the most fines in both 2008 and 2009, fines involving mutual funds dropped dramatically in 2010. There were only 12 such cases in 2010, and only $1.3 million in fines. In comparison, mutual fund cases generated more than $104 million and $95 million in fines in 2005 and 2006. Although the $5.1 million in 2011 fines is only a fraction of these earlier numbers, it is a big increase from 2010’s figures. The number of mutual fund cases (55) and total amount of fines more than quadrupled during the past year compared to 2010.

7. Municipal securities

Finra Fines: $3.7 million
Details: In Finra’s Feb. 8, 2011 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter, it emphasized that member firms need to understand the municipal securities they sell and corresponding regulatory requirements. The SRO’s Jan. 31, 2012 edition of this letter reminded firms that they must ensure that any muni bonds sold are suitable for customers. Finra’s 2011 enforcement reflected a growing concern about munis, as the number of cases reported jumped 81% in 2011. The amount of fines reported in 2011 ($3.7 million) more than doubled the $1.5 million imposed in 2010.

8. Electronic communications

Finra Fines: $3.6 million
Details:The total amount of fines stemming from alleged violations concerning electronic communications has now decreased for three consecutive years. After yielding about $4 million in fines in both 2009 and 2010, these cases resulted in only $3.6 million in fines in 2011. Still, the number of cases actually grew from 34 reported in 2010 to 57 in 2011.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you or a family member have sustained investment losses due to your stock broker or financial advisor’s recommendations, call for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your losses. To speak with an attorney call 888-760-6552, or visit our website at: www.securitieslawyer.com.
 
Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Mar/12

6

FINRA Orders Morgan Keegan to Pay Investor for ARS

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

WASHINGTON — In a February article in The Bond Buyer, Jonathan Hemmerdinger writes that a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel ordered Memphis-based Morgan Keegan & Co. to pay a Birmingham investor $1.95 million for misrepresenting that the Jefferson County, Ala., sewer bonds he purchased were safe, liquid and tax-free investments.

These bonds were actually auction-rate securities and the ARS market collapsed and froze during the financial crisis, leaving investors holding the securities they had purchased.

In an order from FINRA issued Feb. 17, the panel awarded the payment to William W. Featheringill, a Birmingham investor and venture capitalist. The amount of damages equals the amount of ARS Featheringill was left holding.

Mr. Featheringill complained to FINRA in 2010 that staff at AmSouth Investment Services Inc., which became a part of Morgan Keegan in 2007, misrepresented the risks associated with investing in auction-rate securities. Featheringill purchased $3.5 million worth of the sewer bonds in 2005 from AmSouth. That company was acquired by Morgan Keegan’s parent, Regions Financial Corp.

Morgan Keegan said that it is considering an appeal of the decision.

Hemmerdiner writes that Mr. Featheringill said he was unfamiliar with investing in bonds and purchased the securities on the advice of AmSouth staff, who assured him the bonds were safe and that he could get his money every 35 days if he wanted to. Featheringill later sold $1.5 million of the bonds. His holdings totaled $1.95 million in 2010 when he filed the complaint against Morgan Keegan.

The Bond Buyer article goes on to say that auction-rate securities are long-term bonds with interest rates that reset regularly at auctions. ARS are similar to short-term paper because investors can hold them for short periods. But if the auctions fail, as they did when the financial crisis was unfolding in 2008 and dealers stopped supporting the auctions, investors may be stuck holding them indefinitely.

“Unfortunately, the sewer bonds were, in risk and suitability terms, the exact opposite of what they were represented to be,” said Featheringill’s complaint. “This type of investment — auction rate securities — had and still has huge risk of illiquidity and price depreciation.”

Rediker said staffers at Morgan Keegan were aware of problems with ARS in 2007, but failed to notify investors.

“They knew in the fall of 2007 that there was severe risk of failure,” he said.

“The principal amount at issue in this case may seem relatively small, but the securities principles involved were large. They go to governing the fundamental relationship between broker-dealers and their clients,” said Joseph S. Fichera, chief executive officer of Saber Partners LLC, who served as an expert witness for Featheringill. “While each case is fact-specific, the sheer number and variety of ARS cases, even four years after the market dislocation, suggests there were fundamental problems in this market.”

Although the FINRA panel gave Featheringill all of the damages that he asked for, it took no action on the his demand for $5.85 million in punitive damages.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you or a family member have sustained investment losses due to your stock broker or financial advisor’s recommendations, call for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your losses. To speak with an attorney call 888-760-6552, or visit our website at: www.securitieslawyer.com.
 
Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Oct/11

25

Colorado Settles E*Trade Auction Rate Securities

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

The following press release was from the State of Colorado regarding a settlement with E*Trade over the firm’s auction rate securities issues.

Colorado Securities Commissioner Announces Settlement of its Auction Rate Securities Enforcement Action against E*TRADE

The Colorado Securities Commissioner Fred Joseph announced today that a settlement in principle has been reached between E*TRADE Securities, LLC, and the Colorado Division of Securities settling its enforcement action against E*TRADE related to its sale of auction rate securities to Colorado investors. Under the settlement agreement, E*TRADE agreed to buy back approximately $3.5 million worth of auction rate securities from Colorado investors who found themselves unable to sell their securities after they had been frozen in the auction rate securities (“ARS”) market. This settlement also includes a broader agreement by E*TRADE to return approximately $100 million to the firm’s clients on a nationwide basis.

This settlement concludes the Division’s enforcement action initiated to sanction E*TRADE’s license in Colorado for alleged violations of the Colorado Securities Act in connection with the sale of auction rate securities to Colorado investors. A hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer beginning June 6, 2011. On August 12, 2011, Judge Spencer issued his initial decision finding that E*TRADE willfully misrepresented material facts in connection with the sales of auction rate securities to Colorado investors and failed to adequately supervise its financial advisors who sold the auction rate securities to Colorado investors. The Initial Decision by Judge Spencer is not an effective or final order, but was pending with the Securities Commissioner for issuance of a final order.

This settlement also concluded a multi-state investigation of E*TRADE for its role in the sale of auction rate securities for making misleading representations to certain of its clients that auction rate securities were the same as “7 day paper” and were a suitable alternative to money market funds for liquidity purposes. It did so through its sales force, some of whom represented to certain investors that auction rate securities were safe investments for cash management purposes. The auction rate securities markets froze in February of 2008, triggering a flood of complaints from investors who could not withdraw money from their accounts. States received complaints from a wide range of investors who suffered significant financial damage because the money they were told was liquid was tied up in the frozen ARS market.
E*TRADE has agreed to make Colorado investors whole,” said Commissioner Joseph. “Getting this relief for investors was our ultimate goal. I credit the hard work and persistence of the Staff of the Division and the lawyers from the Colorado Attorney General’s office who represented us in our action for achieving this positive result for investors.”

These terms of the settlement include E*TRADE’s agreement to buy back at par all outstanding auction rate securities purchased through the firm by individual investors prior to February 11, 2008, fully reimburse all individual investors who sold their auction rate securities at a discount, reimburse certain investors for the cost of loans after the investor took out a loan from E*TRADE because their securities were frozen, and pay a penalty and the costs of the legal action.

The settlement is the fifteenth that the Securities Commissioner has entered. Previous settlements include Deutsche Bank Securities, Citigroup Global Markets, Bank of America Securities, Credit Suisse Securities, JP Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, RBC Capital Markets, UBS Securities, Wachovia Securities, Stifel Nicolaus, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, TD Ameritrade, and Wells Fargo. The Division continues to investigate possible misconduct by other firms.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you feel you have become a victim of auction-rate securities losses through E*Trade Financial Corporation, call a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your losses. To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com

Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Sep/11

15

SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, SunTrust Investment Services Fined a Total of $5 Million by FINRA for Auction Rate Securities Violations

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

WASHINGTON — In an article from FINRA’s website, The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced that it has fined SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. (SunTrust RH) and SunTrust Investment Services, Inc. (SunTrust IS) for violations related to the sale of auction rate securities (ARS). SunTrust RH, which underwrote the ARS, was fined $4.6 million for failing to adequately disclose the increased risk that auctions could fail, sharing material non-public information, using sales material that did not adequately disclose the risks associated with ARS, and having inadequate supervisory procedures and training concerning the sales and marketing of ARS. SunTrust IS was fined $400,000 for having deficient ARS sales material, procedures and training.

 The FINRA article stated that FINRA found beginning in late summer 2007, SunTrust RH became aware of stresses in the ARS market that raised the risk that auctions might fail. At the same time, SunTrust RH was told by its parent, SunTrust Bank, to reduce its use of the bank’s capital and began to examine whether it had the financial capability in the event of a major market disruption to support all ARS in which it acted as the sole or lead broker-dealer. As these stresses increased, the firm failed to adequately disclose the increased risk to its sales representatives while encouraging them to sell SunTrust RH-led ARS issues in order to reduce the firm’s inventory. As a result, certain SunTrust RH sales representatives continued to sell these ARS as safe and liquid. In February 2008, SunTrust RH stopped supporting ARS auctions, knowing that those auctions would fail and the ARS would become illiquid.

Both SunTrust RH and SunTrust IS used advertising and marketing materials that were not fair and balanced, and did not provide a sound basis for evaluating all the facts about purchasing ARS. Specifically, the materials did not contain adequate disclosure of all the risks of ARS, including adequately disclosing the risk that ARS auctions could fail, rendering the investments illiquid for substantial periods of time. Both firms failed to maintain adequate supervisory procedures and training concerning their sales and marketing of ARS.

The FINRA article adds that FINRA found on Feb. 13, 2008, SunTrust RH shared material non-public information regarding the potential refinancing of certain ARS issues with SunTrust Bank, which was contemplating investing in ARS. This information was material because SunTrust Bank was assured that if the auction market froze, it would likely be able to dispose of the illiquid ARS on the date the ARS was refinanced.

 Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President and Chief of Enforcement, said, “SunTrust Robinson Humphrey and SunTrust Investment Services withheld information about the ARS market which prevented their sales representatives from making proper recommendations and their customers from making informed decisions about ARS. Because of that, the customers were left holding illiquid securities when the auctions failed.”

 FINRA goes on to say that this action concludes the agreements in principle with FINRA that were previously announced in Sept. 2008 and withdrawn in May 2009. SunTrust RH and SunTrust IS voluntarily repurchased approximately $381 million and $262 million of ARS, respectively, from their customers after FINRA began its investigation. In addition, as part of the settlements, the firms will participate in a special FINRA-administered arbitration program for eligible investors to resolve investor claims for consequential damages.

 In concluding these settlements, the firms neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.  This information was obtained from FINRA’s website.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you feel you have become a victim of  SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, SunTrust Investment Services Inc., relating to the sale of auction rate securities (ARS), please call a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your losses.  To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com

Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA  the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Sep/11

14

E*Trade Gets Wells Notice For Auction-Rate Securities

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

NEW YORK - In an article from FoxBusiness.com, Brett Philbin writes that  E*Trade Financial Corp. (ETFC)  received a Wells notice from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority related to the purchase of auction-rate securities by customers of one of its subsidiaries, according to a regulatory filing.  A Wells notice indicates that regulators are recommending enforcement action and gives the company a chance to respond.

Auction-rate securities are long-term debt instruments with attributes of short-term securities because they were resold with new interest rates in periodic auctions. Investors eventually found themselves stuck with the securities after the market froze.

The article states that in its annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the New York online brokerage said its E*Trade Securities, LLC, unit received the notice Feb. 9. E*Trade is the latest online brokerage to face pressure from regulators to make investors whole following the breakdown of the ARS market in 2008.

Philbin writes that last spring, rival TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. (AMTD) agreed to repurchase $305 million in auction-rate securities from clients, while Charles Schwab Corp. (SCHW) received a Wells notice of its own from the SEC as well as a civil complaint from the New York Attorney General in 2009. Schwab filed a motion to dismiss the AG’s case and told Finra it believes the enforcement charges are unwarranted.

 The FoxBusiness article said that in the filing, E*Trade said it is “cooperating with these inquiries and will submit a Wells response to Finra setting forth the bases for E*TRADE Securities’ belief that disciplinary action is not warranted.” The company said the total amount of auction-rate securities held by its customers was $138.2 million as of Dec. 31, 2010.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you feel you have become a victim of  auction-rate securities losses through E*Trade Financial Corporation, call a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your losses.  To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com

Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA  the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

 

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Jun/11

30

Raymond James Financial Inc. Agrees to Settlement with States, SEC over Auction-Rate Securities; to Pay $1.7M Fine

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

In a June 29, 2011, article by Bruce Kelly for InvestmentNews.com he writes that as part of a settlement with eight states and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Raymond James Financial Inc. will buy back $300 million in auction-rate securities from clients and pay a fine of $1.7 million. The states in charge of the settlement are Florida and Texas. Other states involved were Indiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.

It was reported that Raymond James has 30 days to extend an offer to repurchase the securities, and the offer must be open for 75 days after that initial bid.

Raymond James’ registered representatives and financial advisers told their customers that ARS were “cash equivalents” and “highly liquid” short-term investments that sported a higher yield than money market accounts, according to the consent order for the dispute.

Kelly goes on to say that Raymond James has been dealing with the ARS mess since the winter of 2008, when the market froze for billions of dollars of the securities, leaving institutional and retail clients locked into large cash positions. In August 2008, Raymond James said it was subject to investigations by regulators regarding the ARS sold be its registered reps to clients, who owned about $1.3 billion in paper at that time. Since then, the firm has been unwinding its position, but the issue of buying back ARS has been a thorn in the side of the brokerage for some time. In March 2009, the firm’s chairman and former chief executive, Tom James, said it was possible that Raymond James could sue an issuer of the securities, Pacific Investment Management Co. LLC, if it failed to buy back the securities from clients.

“These [issuing firms] are going to refinance; otherwise, as I’ve told them, ‘We’re going to sue you guys,’” Mr. James said at the time. “‘You don’t understand. We distributed for you guys, and you haven’t lived up to your obligations.’”

It was reported in the InvestmentNews.com article that Raymond James, which neither admitted to or denied the allegations, noted that it was fined by the states, not the SEC.

“Raymond James leadership worked diligently to facilitate redemptions by the issuers of ARS,” the firm said in a statement. “Client holdings at the firm were reduced from approximately $2.1 billion in February 2008 to $280 million this month.”

“I am pleased we are able to resolve this issue and provide liquidity to clients who continue to hold ARS in their portfolios,” said CEO Paul Reilly.

The $300 million buyback seems a large sum for Raymond James to pay, considering in May the B-D noted that “any action by a regulatory authority to compel us to repurchase the outstanding ARS held by our clients would likely be vigorously contested by us.”

What’s more, rival Morgan Keegan & Co. Inc. yesterday won a major court victory stemming from its sales of ARS. A federal judge in Atlanta on Tuesday rejected SEC claims that the brokerage, a unit of Regions Financial Corp., misled investors about $2.2 billion in ARS. In announcing the summary judgment, U.S. District Court Judge William S. Duffey Jr. said “failure to predict the market does not amount to securities fraud.”

The above information was obtained from InvestmentNews.com.

Attorney Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, feels this is good news for many of his clients who have pending FINRA arbitrations against Raymond James Financial. If you or a loved one have purchased auction rate securities from Raymond James call Soreide Law Group, PLLC and speak to a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to recover your losses.  To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com.

Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA  the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Jun/11

30

RAYMOND JAMES MAKES OFFER TO PURCHASE AUCTION RATE SECURITIES

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

The following information was posted on Raymond James’ website:

Raymond James Offer to purchase eligible auction rate securities

After providing ready liquidity to investors for over 23 years, in mid-February 2008 the Auction Rate Securities (ARS) market reacted to the unprecedented contractions in the credit markets, resulting in widespread auction failures. While some issuers have redeemed significant portions of their outstanding ARS, the market for ARS remains mostly illiquid.

To address this illiquidity for clients, Raymond James is offering to purchase eligible ARS that clients purchased through us.

Raymond James’ offer to purchase outstanding ARS comes after a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the North American Securities Administrators Association.

Purchase request process

Qualified investors will receive information with terms of and instructions for redemption by mail within 30 days of the public announcement (June 29, 2011). Clients who believe they are eligible and do not receive instructions should contact their financial advisor or Raymond James Client Services at 800-647-7378.

For ARS to be eligible for the purchase offer, the following must be true:

  • The securities must have been purchased from Raymond James on or before February 13, 2008.
  • Clients must have held those securities on February 13, 2008.
  • Clients must currently own the securities or have sold them below par value.
  • The securities must have failed at auction at least once since February 13, 2008.
  • The securities must not have been called or redeemed, or be subject to calls or redemptions as of June 29, 2011.

In accordance with the settlement, Raymond James will continue to consider client inquiries until 12 a.m. September 30, 2011.

Pricing and fees

If clients accept the offer, Raymond James will purchase eligible ARS at par value, which is the face value of the security. They will also receive payment of interest or dividends, if any, at the rate established at the last reset date and will not incur any fees or commissions for transactions related to the purchase of eligible securities.

Other claims

Participating in this offer will not result in a waiver of any claims you may have against Raymond James. Important information on arbitration procedures that have been established to resolve any claims are available.

The above information was posted on Raymond James’ website.

Attorney Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, wants you to know that if you or a loved one DO NOT meet this criteria, call a Securities Arbitration Lawyer for a free consultation on how to recover your losses.  To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit www.securitieslawyer.com.

Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA  the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Find it!

Theme Design by devolux.nh2.me
To top