Securities Lawyer Blog | Victim of Fraud?

TAG | stockbroker misconduct

Jan/13

22

Sarasota, FL, Rep Barred by FINRA

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

The following information is from FINRA’s website under “Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions, January, 2013.”

William Earl Manley (CRD #1177744, Registered Representative, Sarasota, Florida)

was barred from association with any FINRA member in any capacity. Without admitting or denying the findings, Manley consented to the described sanction and to the entry of findings that he failed to respond to a FINRA request for information regarding his arrest, felony charge and termination from his member firm. The findings stated that Manley advised FINRA he would not respond to a request for information.

(FINRA Case #2012031461701)

This ends the information from FINRA’s website.

If you feel you may have a claim against William Earl Manley, contact
Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, who represents clients nationwide before FINRA. For a free consultation with an attorney on how to potentially recover your losses, call 888-760-6552, or visit our website at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Jan/13

22

Miami Rep Barred by FINRA

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

The following information is from FINRA’s website under “Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions, January, 2013.”

John Boyd Dexter (CRD #1354376, Registered Principal, North Miami, Florida)

was barred from association with any FINRA member in any capacity. Without admitting or denying the findings, Dexter consented to the described sanction and to the entry of findings that he failed to appear for
testimony as FINRA requested in connection with an investigation that FINRA had initiated concerning alleged suspicious activity at a member firm’s branch, where Dexter was employed as branch office manager.

The findings stated that in a telephone conversation with FINRA, Dexter stated that he would not provide testimony or cooperate with the
investigation because he was no longer employed in the securities industry. (FINRA Case #2011030204601)
This ends the information from FINRA’s website.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, represents clients nationwide before FINRA. If you or a loved one 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: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Jan/13

8

New FINRA Rule 5123 Regarding the Sale of Private Placements Became Effective December 3, 2012

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

In an effort to protect investors over the sale of private placements, the new Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Rule 5123, was effective on December 3, 2012. Under the new FINRA Rule 5123, FINRA member firms that sell an issuer’s securities in a private placement will be required, subject to certain exemptions (which include private offerings to most types of institutional investors), to:
•file with FINRA a copy of any offering documents used to sell the private placement, such as private placement memoranda, term sheets or other offering documents or
•indicate that no offering documents were used.

Member firms must make this filing within 15 days from the date the firm makes the first sale of securities in private placements. New FINRA Rule 5123 also requires that firms file any amended versions of offering documents originally filed.

The new FINRA Rule 5123 will be limited primarily to private placements involving individual accredited and non-accredited investors who are not exempt from the Rule’s filing requirements.

Each member firm that participates as a placement agent in the offering is responsible for filing under new FINRA Rule 5123, but one member firm may be designated to file on behalf of the other participating member firms as long as all participating member firms are listed in the FINRA filing. Each firm relying on a designated filer should receive confirmation of the filing from the designated filer to satisfy its own filing obligation. Also, exemptions are applied on a firm-by-firm basis. Firms must electronically file the requisite offering documents in searchable PDF format with FINRA through the Private Placement Filing System on the FINRA Firm Gateway.

Available Exemptions

The new FINRA Rule 5123 includes private placement offerings solely to one or more of the following purchasers:

•Institutional accounts
•Qualified purchasers
•Qualified institutional buyers
•Investment companies
•An entity composed exclusively of qualified institutional buyers
•Banks
•Employees and affiliates of the issuer
•Knowledgeable employees
•Eligible contract participants and
•Institutional accredited investors

Other private placements that are exempt from filing under new FINRA Rule 5123 include, offerings of exempt securities, Rule 144A and Regulation S offerings, and offerings of interests in commodity pools operated by a registered commodity pool operator. New FINRA Rule 5123 will, in practice, be limited primarily to private placements involving individual accredited and non-accredited investors, who are not exempt from the Rule’s filing requirements.

New FINRA Rule 5123 became effective on December 3, 2012, and applies only prospectively to private placements that begin selling efforts on or after that date.

Under Rule 5122, FINRA outlines standards on disclosure, use of proceeds and filing requirements for private placements of securities issued by member firms themselves, rather than sales of securities by other issuers. Also effective December 3, 2012, firms must submit filings regarding member firm private offerings, as required by FINRA Rule 5122, through the FINRA Firm Gateway.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, represents clients nationwide before FINRA. If you or a loved one 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. Visit our website at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Jan/13

3

Were You a Former Client of Tracey Crownover?

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Soreide Law Group is currently investigating potential claims regarding the sale of variable life insurance policies and certain Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) sold by former Ameriprise financial advisor, Tracey Crownover. Ms. Crownover was terminated by Ameriprise for failing to follow firm policies. Tracey Crownover has over 25 reported customer disputes through the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

If you feel you may have a claim against former Ameriprise broker Tracey Helaine Crownover, call 888-760-6552.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, represents clients nationwide before FINRA. If you or a loved one 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. Visit our website at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Dec/12

19

Variable Annuity Contracts That Have a Guaranteed Minimum Benefit “GMIB” Feature

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

As a general rule, investment performance for the last ten years has generally been mediocre. This is true not only for most individual investors, but also for many institutional investors and insurance companies. From early 2000 through 2007, the insurance industry sold a significant amount of variable annuity contracts that included a guaranteed minimum income benefit (GMIB) feature. With hindsight, the insurance industry (as a whole) is realizing that it often materially mispriced those contracts – in favor of the annuity owner. Most companies have since changed their pricing and feature models on their more current contracts. For the older contracts that are “locked in”, some companies are even making unsolicited cash-out offers, in an effort to entice those annuity holders to exit their (the remaining companies) “problem” contracts.

It would indeed be the rare annuity contract holder that truly understands the provisions and nuances of his/her 2000 to 2007 years’ contracts (and the insurance company is absolutely not going to tell them how to take advantage of those contracts). Such annuity holders can significantly and substantially better his/her overall related gain, if informed on how to do so. This is truly an area where what you do not know can hurt you.

We believe the insurance company and industry (as a whole) is intentionally not explaining the opportunities and benefits an owner could derive from those contracts. Why? Because, if the individuals knew, it could be very good for the annuitant – but bad for the issuing insurance company. As an industry, they are obviously looking out for #1 (i.e., the insurance companies).

Provisions and elections that may need to be addressed will probably relate to current and future income flow. If the annuity carries a “Guaranteed Minimum Income Benefit” rider, this type of rider allows you to receive income distributions, while still preserving the principal for a future lifetime income stream. We will be looking for any income stream that may be available, while still maintaining a level death benefit amount. Some contracts give very specific restrictions regarding withdrawal amounts and any withdrawal exceeding the limits can cause the beneficial contract clause to be lost.

Other contracts have riders with “expiration” dates that, effectively, require you to “use the benefit or lose it.” Annuities can be costly products and failure to be familiar with the details can result in costly mistakes. For example, there are often investment restrictions attached to income riders. Investment in a conservative fixed-income fund may reduce or even nullify income guarantees in the contract. A major issue that will be reviewed is ownership of the contract. Many annuity contracts allow for a “spousal” continuation at the owner’s death. This can be a crucial income source for the remaining spouse. (Be careful because this provision probably is not available in the annuity contract; however, you can be sure that the company is not emphasizing some of the less favorable (for the company) aspects of their produce. Thus, all of this is further complicated by the difficulty in just getting the appropriate information from the insurance company. Such information is often being legally – but, we believe, all too often intentionally and deliberately provided in a misleading and/or an entirely missing fashion. Also, some of these contracts only have periodic “windows” to make certain decisions and some of these “windows” are extremely short – as little as 72 hours, per year.

If you or a loved one recently sold your Guaranteed Minimum Benefit annuity back to your annuity company, call Soreide Law Group and speak to an attorney at (888) 760-6552, or visit our website at http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Dec/12

18

Reps Fined and Suspended by FINRA

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

The following information is from FINRA’s website under “Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions, December, 2012.”

Shari Robin Frimer (CRD #2503895, Registered Representative, Eastport, New York) and Thomas Joseph Heaphy Jr. (CRD #2540325, Registered Representative, Boynton Beach, Florida)

submitted an Offer of Settlement in which Frimer was fined $32,407.50, which
includes disgorgement of financial benefits of $17,407.50, and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for seven months. The amount of the fine has been reduced to reflect Frimer’s payment of a $20,000 fine to the State of Florida Office of Financial Regulation. Heaphy was fined $40,827.50, which includes disgorgement of financial benefits of $30,827.50, and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for nine months.

Without admitting or denying the allegations, Frimer and Heaphy participated
in private securities offerings by selling securities offerings to customers and receiving selling compensation for their sales.

FINRA’s findings stated that prior to participating in the private securities transactions, Frimer and Heaphy did not provide written notice to their
member firm and did not receive the requisite approval from their firm to participate in the transactions.

FINRA reported that Frimer’s and Heaphy’s participation in the transactions was outside the regular scope or course of their employment with their firm. The findings also stated that Frimer guaranteed, in writing, to a customer that he would be able to sell shares of a stock within a certain time period for his cost to acquire them.

The findings also included that Frimer sent, or caused to be sent, marketing newsletters regarding a company to firm customers, without requesting or receiving the firm’s approval to disseminate the newsletters. The newsletters were not fair and balanced, failed to provide a sound basis for evaluating the facts in regard to the company, and contained exaggerated, unwarranted,
and misleading claims and unreasonable and unwarranted forecasts.

FINRA found that Heaphy willfully failed to timely amend his Form U4 to disclose a material fact, a lien placed on his property for unpaid taxes, and willfully failed to disclose the material fact on the Form U4 that a member firm filed for him.

Frimer’s suspension is in effect from November 5, 2012, through June 4, 2013. Heaphy’s suspension is in effecfrom November 5, 2012, through August 4, 2013. (FINRA Case #2008012059501)

This ends the information from FINRA’s website.

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, represents clients nationwide before FINRA. If you or a loved one 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: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Dec/12

6

FINRA Awards $1.8 million

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Straccia v. Focus Capital, FINRA ID # 11-02737 (Manchester, NH, 11/27/2012) –

A FINRA Arbitration Panel awarded $1.8 million in compensatory damages, interest, attorney fees and costs to a group of customers who complained about various trading strategies.

Securities Lawyer, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, represents clients nationwide before FINRA. If you or a loved one 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 through a FINRA arbitration. To speak with an attorney call 888-760-6552, or visit our website at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Dec/12

5

Did You Purchase Cyprus Equipment Fund Private Placements?

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Soreide Law Group securities attorney, Lars Soreide, is currently investigating Cyprus Equipment Fund 14, LLC. If your broker sold you this private placement, and you experienced financial losses, we would like to speak to you.

The following are the other Cyprus Equiment Funds:

Cypress Equipment Fund VII
Cypress Equipment Fund VIII
Cypress Equipment Fund IX
Cypress Equipment Fund X
Cypress Equipment Fund XI
Cypress Equipment Fund XII
Cypress Equipment Fund 13
Cypress Equipment Fund 14
Cypress Equipment Fund 15
Cypress Equipment Fund 16
Cypress Equipment Fund 17
Cypress Growth Fund

Cypress Financial Corporation is based in San Francisco and is an equipment leasing company. Cypress offers “private placements” to the public, which are then sold by FINRA registered broker/dealers.

Soreide Law Group, PLLC, represents clients nationwide. Call for a free consultation on how to potentially recover your private placement financial losses. To speak with an attorney call 888-760-6552, or visit our website at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Nov/12

2

Did You Invest in Bryn Mawr CLO Ltd., or LCM VII Ltd?

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Soreide Law Group is currently investigating these collateralized loan obligations (CLOs): Bryn Mawr CLO II Ltd., and LCM VII Ltd(Lyon Capital Management). Bank of America was the underwriter and sold several CLO’s, including Bryn Mawr and LCM VII. Many of these CLOs resulted in huge losses for the investors.

The state of Massachusetts is currently investigating records and documents from Banc of America Securities LLC (now known as Merrill Lynch) allegedly related to these two CLOs, Bryn Mawr CLO II Ltd., and LCM VII Ltd—sold in 2007.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), on January 31, 2012, issued an award ordering Merrill Lynch (Banc of America Securities) to pay an LCM VII Ltd. investor $1.38 million, which was the total loss of his investment, plus costs and attorney’s fees.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide before FINRA. If you have sustained investment losses due to your stock broker or financial advisor’s recommendations regarding CLOs, 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: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

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

Oct/12

23

FINRA Names Florida Rep in Customer Complaint

Comments off · Posted by Securities Lawyer in FINRA

Levinski Dealexis Barnes (CRD #2292179, Registered Representative, Lutz, Florida)

has been named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he discussed with a customer an investment in an accounting business that Barnes and other individuals were contemplating purchasing.

The FINRA complaint alleges that Barnes told the customer that if the
offer for the business was not accepted, his funds would be returned to him in full. Then, the customer agreed to purchase an interest in the business and wired an aggregate of $50,000 to an entity Barnes owned and controlled.

The FINRA complaint also alleges that Barnes informed the customer that they did not win the bid to purchase the business and that the $50,000 could not be repaid immediately.

Barnes wired the customer a total of $13,300 but has not repaid the balance of $36,700, thereby exercising unauthorized control over the customer’s
funds to which he was not entitled and making improper use of the customer’s funds.

This complaint further alleges that Barnes failed to timely and completely respond to FINRA requests for information and documentation regarding his entity’s bank account, thereby impeding FINRA’s investigation and preventing FINRA from completing its regulatory responsibility to fully investigate potential rule violations.
(FINRA Case #2010024271001)

The above information was obtained from FINRA’s website listed under “Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions, October, 2012.”

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, represents clients nationwide. For a free consultation on how to potentially recover your financial losses please call: 888-760-6552, or you may visit our website and complete the online form at: http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Older posts >>

Find it!

Theme Design by devolux.nh2.me
To top