Soeide Law Group is currently investigating broker, Bambi I. Holzer, CRD #1088028. Ms. Holzer is currently a registered representative with Newport Coast Securities of Beverly Hills, CA. There have allegedly been numerous (over 50) reports filed against her in her 25+ year career, and over $11 million in awards and settlements. Several of these complaints have been regarding the improper sale of private placements, and the sale of variable annuities, another high-risk product that is now under heavy scrutiny from federal regulators.

She was previously employed by these Beverly Hills, CA, brokerages: Wedbush Morgan Securities, Sequoia Equities Securities Corp., and Brookstreet Securities Corp.

If you feel you may have a claim against Bambi Holzer 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.

Bambi Holzer · Bambi Holzer Newport Coast Securities · Bambi I Holzer Beverly Hills CA · brokerage supervisory deficiencies · brokers recommending risky investments · Brookstreet Securities Corp. · failure to supervise brokers · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · FINRA brokercheck · finra lawyer · finra securities arbitration · finra securities arbitration lawyer · high-risk private placements · Lars Soreide · life insurance lawyer · Newport Coast Securities · private placement loss lawyer · private placements · securities arbitraton lawyer · Sequoia Equities Securities Corp · Soreide Law Group PLLC · stock loss · variable annuities · variable annuity loss lawyer · wedbush morgan securities inc

Massachusetts securities regulators sued LPL Financial, LLC, in December over sales practices of brokers regarding the REITs. Secretary of the Commonwealth, William Galvin, charged LPL Financial with a failure to supervise registered reps who sold the nontraded REITs in violation of both state limitations and the company’s rules. The Securities Division also charged LPL Financial with dishonest and unethical business practices writes Bruce Kelly in an article in InvestmentNews.com.

These charges stem from the sales of $28 million of nontraded REITs to almost 600 clients from 2006 to 2009. The Securities Division found that 569 had regulatory violations. These included sales made in violation of Massachusetts 10% concentration limits; sales made in violation of prospectus requirement; and sales made in violation of LPL compliance practices. LPL received gross commission of $1.8 million for those sales, according to the complaint.

The InvestmentNews.com article goes on to say that the largest amount of sales was for Inland American Real Estate Trust Inc., the largest nontraded REIT in the industry, with $11.2 billion in real estate assets. Massachusetts investors put at least $20.1 million in Inland American, which is currently the focus of a fact-finding investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Massachusetts is seeking full restitution to clients in the state who were sold REITs allegedly in violation of state and prospectus requirements. It is also seeking an unspecified administrative fine against the firm.

LPL Financial is the largest independent broker-dealer, with more than 13,000 registered reps and advisers. Along with Ameriprise Financial Inc., it is one of the largest sellers of nontraded REITs, which are sold only through independent broker-dealers. The investments are marketed as a way to diversify an investor’s portfolio and generate income.

Nontraded REITs, which had over $10 billion in sales in 2012, have drawn attention from regulators and the market recently. Many notable REITs took hits in 2008 and 2009 during the broad downturn of the commercial real estate market. Some of the industry’s largest REITs have suffered a drop in valuations of 25% to 50%, and some REITs have also cut dividends to investors.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you or a family member have experienced losses through LPL Financial, LLC, 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 http://www.securitieslawyer.com.
Soreide Law Group, PLLC., representing investors nationwide before FINRA the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

Ameriprise Financial Inc · brokerage supervisory deficiencies · brokers recommending risky investments · failure to supervise brokers · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · finra lawyer · finra securities arbitration lawyer · high risk investments · inadequate supervisory procedures by broker/dealers · inland american real estate trust inc · Inland American REIT · Lars K. Soreide Soreide Law Group · LPL Financial LLC · LPL nontraded REITs · LPL sued by Massachusetts · LPL variable annuities · nontraded real estate investment trusts · Nontraded REIT loss lawyer · Nontraded REITs · REIT loss Lawyer · securities lawyer · Soreide Law Group PLLC · Stock fraud lawyer · variable annuities

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.

annuities with GMIB feature · annuity contract holders · beneficial gains in annuity for the holder · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · fort lauderdale securities fraud lawyer · GMIB feature · guaranteed minimum income benefit · Guarnateed Minimum Income Benefit annuity rider · inadequate supervisory procedures by broker/dealers · income riders on annuity · insurance company annuity · Lars Soreide · life insurance lawyer · life settlement investments · securities lawyer · Soreide Law Group PLLC · stockbroker misconduct · understanding variable annunities · variable annuities

Donald Dean Horras CRD# 1056123

Soreide Law Group is investigating claims on behalf of investors who were clients of Ft. Lauderdale broker, Donald Horras, who was with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, and according to FINRA’s BrokerCheck, is currently with Raymond James and Associates of Ft. Lauderdale. Allegedly, Donald Horras, made unsuitable recommendations to elderly customers resulting in financial losses.

Horras is alleged to have recommended variable annuities that were inappropriate for the elderly clients’ portfolios and resulted in the loss of their retirement savings.

On FINRA’s BrokerCheck, Donald Horras’ record shows several client complaints, primarily relating to the sale of annuities.

If you or a family member were sold variable annuities by Donald Dean Horras and experienced financial losses, contact an attorney at Soreide Law Group for a free consultation on how to recover your investment losses. To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

brokerage supervisory deficiencies · brokers recommending risky investments · Donald Dean Horras Ft Lauderdale FL · Donald Horras FINRA claims · elder abuse in investments · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · finra lawyer · fort lauderdale securities fraud lawyer · Ft. Lauderdale Securities Lawyer · inadequate supervisory procedures by broker/dealers · Lars Soreide · Soreide Law Group PLLC · supervisory failures · targeting elderly investors · Unsuitable investments to elderly · unsuitable variable annuities · variable annuities · variable annuities Donald Horras · variable annuity loss lawyer · variable annuity losses

FINRA, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is investigating independent broker-dealers that sold variable annuities with subaccounts invested in hedge funds that resulted in $18 million in client losses during the credit crisis writes Bruce Kelly in a recent article for InvestmentNews.com.

FINRA has been investigating the sale of a variable annuity issued by Sun Life Financial Inc. The two hedge funds were the Foresee Strategies Insurance Fund and the Foresee Strategies 3(c)(1) Insurance Fund LP, which were related to a group called the SALI Multi-Series Fund LP.

Kelly writes that the broker-dealers that have faced FINRA arbitration complaints from investors regarding the Sun Life annuities include: Geneos Wealth Management Inc., Lincoln Financial Network, National Planning Corp., SagePoint Financial Inc., and FSC Securities Corp.

A FINRA spokeswoman Michelle Ong would say only that the brokerage industry’s self-regulator does not confirm investigations.

A FINRA arbitration panel has issued a $284,000 award to a SagePoint client, who filed a claim against the firm last year. His arbitration complaint alleged unsuitability, common law fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence related to investments in the SALI Multi-Series Fund and the SALI Multi-Series Fund 3(c) (1) LP.

InvestmentNews.com writes that the fund was put together in 2004 to 2007, which was called a period of low volatility. The strategy collapsed when the market crashed beginning in September 2008 and then rebounded sharply in March 2009. One fund lost 90% of its value; the other lost 75%.

Three of the broker-dealers have resolved litigation, with more to come against SagePoint and National Planning. Investors are also suing Sun Life Financial in state court in Tennessee.

If you or a family member were sold a variable annuity with a hedge fund and experienced financial losses, contact an attorney at Soreide Law Group for a free consultation on how to recover your investment losses. To speak with an attorney, call 888-760-6552, or visit http://www.securitieslawyer.com.

brokerage supervisory deficiencies · brokers recommending risky investments · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · foresee Strategies 3 (c)(1) Insurance Fund LP · Foresse Strategies Insurance Fund · fort lauderdale securities fraud lawyer · FSC Securities Corp · Geneos Wealth Management Inc. · hedge fund loss · hedge fund loss lawyer · high risk investments · inadequate supervisory procedures by broker/dealers · Lars Soreide · Lincoln Financial Network · National Planning Corp · risky investments · SagePoint Financial Inc. · SALI Multi-Series Fund LP · Soreide Law Group PLLC · stock loss · Sun Life Financial · Sun Life Financial Inc · Sun Life varible annuity loss · variable annuities · variable annuity losses

Andrew James Aragona (CRD #1320844, Registered Representative, Deerfield Beach,Florida)

was fined $138,500 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for one year. These sanctions were based on findings that Aragona recommended unsuitable variable annuity switches to an elderly customer.

The FINRA findings stated that Aragona failed to conduct an objective, quantitative analysis of the benefits of the recommended switches, so the customer incurred $130,000 in surrender fees, which was more than 10 percent of the value of her investment, but Aragona earned $123,500 from the switches.

The suspension is in effect from July 2, 2012, through July 1, 2013.
(FINRA Case #2010023963301)

This information was found on FINRA’s website under “Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions, July, 2012.”

Securities Lawyer, Lars K. Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, represents clients nationwide. 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.

Andrew J Aragona Deerfield Beach FL · Andrew James Aragona Fined and Suspended by FINRA · broker failure to conduct due diligence · broker fees inflated · broker taking high fees · brokerage supervisory deficiencies · brokers recommending risky investments · elder abuse in investments · failure to supervise brokers · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · Ft. Lauderdale Securities Lawyer · inadequate supervisory procedures by broker/dealers · Lars K. Soreide Soreide Law Group · risky investments · securities lawyer · stockbroker misconduct · supervisory failures · targeting elderly investors · Unsuitable investments to elderly · unsuitable variable annuities · unsuitable variable annuity switches to elderly · variable annuities · variable annuities losses · variable annuity switches

In an article for InvestmentNews.com, on February 1st, 2012, Mark Schoeff Jr. writes that in a market defined by low interest rates, investors are searching for higher returns. But brokers better be careful how they try to deliver those results, according to their primary regulator.

In a 16 page letter posted on its website, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc., (FINRA)  outlined its regulatory and examination priorities for 2012. At the top of the list: conduct and products meant to beat the market that instead are unsuitable for investors.

“FINRA is informing its examination priorities against the economic environment that investors have faced since 2008, as these circumstances have steadily contributed to conditions that foster an increased risk of aggressive yield chasing, inappropriate sales practices, unsuitable product offerings, and misappropriation and fraud,” the letter states.

“Given the low yields on Treasuries, we are concerned that investors may be inadvertently taking risks that they do not understand or that are inadequately disclosed as they chase yields,” the letter continues. Lack of liquidity and inadequate cash flow in investments also are red flags Finra is monitoring.

Shoeff writes that among the products that are on FINRA’s watch list for suitability problems: residential- and commercial-mortgage-backed securities, nontraded real estate investment trusts, municipal securities, exchange-traded funds using synthetic derivatives and significant leverage, variable annuities, structured products, private placements and life settlements.

FINRA said that it is undertaking a “broader data collection effort” and targeting its enforcement efforts on high-risk firms.  FINRA warned brokers not to enhance their balance sheets by taking on excessive debt or manipulating their assets and liabilities.

“FINRA is concerned about the additional risks that are being taken as a result of increased leverage, including market, credit and liquidity risk,” the letter states. “We will continue to monitor firms that employ a high degree of leverage, both on-balance-sheet and off-balance-sheet during the upcoming year.”

The InvestmentNews.com article goes on to say that FINRA also is zeroing in on fees.

“We remain concerned about firms’ charging retail investors hidden, mislabeled or excessive fees,” the letter states. “In 2011, FINRA brought cases against several broker-dealers that charged such excessive fees in the form of postage and handling charges that were unrelated to actual costs, and we will continue to investigate firms that appear to be taking advantage of investors through fee schemes.”

FINRA’s guidance on social media is less explicit. It said that it “is a topic on which we continue to receive many questions from firms.” FINRA reiterated that “core regulatory requirements apply to all communications with the public, irrespective of the medium or device used to communicate. Firms must be able to appropriately supervise business communications made using personal devices.”

Schoeff writes that high-frequency trading, and oversight of the creation and redemption of exchange-traded funds, also are listed among the agency’s many priorities. FINRA oversees about 4,460 broker-dealers and enforces the suitability standard, which requires brokers to sell products that fit their clients’ investment needs, timelines and risk appetites.

Other regulators are paying attention to FINRA’s priorities as   well.

“States look at these very highly,” said Steve Thomas, director of Lexington Compliance, a division of RIA in a Box LLC, and former South Dakota chief compliance examiner. “They make individual decisions on whether these items should be added to their state’s examinations.”

brokers recommending risky investments · commercial mortgaged backed securities · elder abuse in investments · Executives failing to look into private placements · failure to supervise brokers · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA 16 page letter against risky investments · finra lawyer · FINRA targeting high risk firms · FINRA watching broker fees · FINRA watching for risky investments · fort lauderdale securities lawyer · high risk investments · high-risk private placements · investment fraud · investors taking risks · lack of liquidity · Lars Soreide · life settlements · misrepresenting life settlements to customers · Municipal securities · nontraded real estate investment trusts · private placements · products meant to beat the market are unsuitable · real estate fund loss lawyer · Real Estate Investment Trust · REIT · REIT recovery lawyer · risky investments · risky REITs · securities lawyer · Soreide Law Group PLLC · stock broker fraud · Stock fraud lawyer · stock loss · stockbroker misconduct · structured products · targeting elderly investors · Unsuitable investments to elderly · unsuitable private placements · va · variable annuities

Raymond James Financial Services Inc., has paid a $1.79 million arbitration award to an 87-year-old client after going to state court to appeal the judgment writes Darla Mercado, in a November 30, 2011, article for the InvestmentNews.com.

The Honorable Judge Emily Tobolowsky, of the 298th Judicial District Court in Dallas last month confirmed the award and denied the broker-dealer’s motion to vacate the payment, a move that few broker-dealers attempt to make.

The FINRA arbitration panel ordered Raymond James to pay some $1.7 million in May, plus interest, to elderly client Hurshel Tyler and the estate of his deceased wife, Mildred. The sum is thought to be the largest award ever against Raymond James.

Mercado writes that the Tylers, both in their late 80s when the case first went to arbitration, had some $3.5 million in bond funds. But they allegedly were encouraged by a former Raymond James broker, then based in Amarillo, Texas, to put the money into variable annuities and variable life insurance.

This variable life insurance policy was loaded down with $2 million in improper loans — along with continuing tax and interest obligations — that would have made it difficult to return the product to the broker-dealer, according to a transcript from a court hearing in September. “From a supervisory standpoint, the large loans taken out against the policy should have been red-flagged,” the Tylers’ attorney said in an interview with InvestmentNews. The couple had contended that the investments were unsuitable; an arbitration panel from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. decided in their favor.

In appealing this decision, Raymond James claimed that the Tylers should have returned the annuities, which had grown by more than $958,000. Initially, the elderly couple had sought return of their money, but were instead awarded compensatory damages and were not instructed to return the annuities.

Raymond James had also argued that the $250,000 it was supposed to pay the Tylers in attorneys’ fees ought to be vacated because laws in Florida — where Raymond James is based — don’t allow for such awards.

The InvestmentNews.com article goes on to say that the attorney for the Tylers asserted that Raymond James never brought up that argument in the arbitration discussions in March this year, nor did it ever object to her presentation of the case under Texas law.

“Raymond James continues to believe that the award in this matter is a miscarriage of justice. The Tylers made a profit in excess of $800,000 during the period of time that the Tylers maintained accounts with Raymond James and suffered losses when they transferred their accounts to another broker-dealer,” said the director of litigation at Raymond James. He added,”Raymond James believes the panel erroneously held Raymond James responsible for those losses. Notwithstanding that fact, Raymond James has determined, after reviewing the anticipated time and resources necessary to continue to fight what we still believe to be an erroneous award, to put the matter behind us and move forward.”

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you or a family member have experienced losses through Raymond James Financial Services, Inc., 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.

bond fund loss · brokers selling investments not suitable for elder clients · elder abuse · elder abuse awareness · elder abuse by stockbrokers · elder abuse in investments · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · finra securities arbitration · Ft. Lauderdale Securities Lawyer · Hurshel Tyler awarded money from Raymond James · Largest award against Raymond James · Lars Soreide · Raymond James · Raymond James Financial Services · Raymond James Financial Services Inc · raymond james loss · securities arbitraton lawyer · securities lawyer · Soreide Law Group PLLC · targeting elderly investors · Unsuitable investments to elderly · unsuitable variable annuities · variable annuities · variable annuities losses · variable life insurance · variale life insurance loss

WASHINGTON —It was announced on FINRA’s website that The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has suspended William Bailey, a former NEXT Financial Group, Inc. broker of Mesa, Arizona, from the securities industry for two years for unsuitable and excessive trading of mutual funds and variable annuities. Bailey also engaged in discretionary trading without receiving prior written approval from his customers.

In the article it stated that FINRA found between January 2006 and December 2007, Bailey recommended 484 short-term mutual fund switch transactions in seven customer accounts. In each of the accounts, Bailey, on his customers’ behalf, repeatedly sold mutual funds less than one year after purchasing them, and purchased new mutual funds with the proceeds. With Bailey’s frequent switches, on average, his customers held their mutual funds for only 60 days. The seven customers, who ranged in age from 66 to 93 and were all unsophisticated investors, incurred over $147,000 in sales charges and trading fees. Bailey received over $120,000 in commissions from these sales. To facilitate his mutual fund trading scheme, Bailey frequently traded in his customers’ accounts without first obtaining their permission and improperly completed customer account forms to make it appear the customers approved of the trading.

 Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President and Chief of Enforcement, said, “Brokers who engage in excessive trading will be held accountable. In this case, Mr. Bailey rapidly switched his elderly and unsophisticated customers in and out of mutual funds with high costs, providing a benefit to Bailey instead of to his customers.”

Additionally, FINRA also found that Bailey convinced three customers to switch their variable annuities for new ones after holding them for a short period of time. These exchanges were unsuitable based on the customers financial objectives and needs, and did not improve the customers’ financial situations.

 In settling this matter, Bailey neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings. This information was obtained on 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 William Bailey of NEXT Financial Group, Inc., or a similar situation, 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.

broker failing to receive approval from customers to trade · brokers recommending risky investments · elder abuse · elder abuse in investments · excessive trading of mutual funds by broker · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · finra securities arbitration · finra securities arbitration lawyer · fort lauderdale securities fraud lawyer · fort lauderdale securities lawyer · Ft. Lauderdale Securities Lawyer · high risk investments · improper trading by broker · Lars Soreide · risky investments · securities arbitraton lawyer · securities fraud lawyer · securities lawyer · short-term mutual fund switch transactions · Soreide Law Group PLLC · Stock fraud lawyer · targeting elderly investors · unsophisticated investors taken advantage of by brokers · unsuitable variable annuities · variable annuities · William Bailey · William Bailey broker suspended · Willliam Bailey Next Financial Group suspended

A Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel has ordered Wedbush Securities and one of its former brokers to pay $2.9 million in damages and fees to an elderly investor who allegedly fell victim to a faulty investment scheme. The founder Edward Wedbush, and broker Debbie Michelle Saleh were ordered to pay $2,865,885 in damages. The victim of this securities case, Rick Cooper, continued working with Debbie Michelle Saleh, who previously served as his mother’s broker, after she moved to Wedbush from Wachovia Securities LLC in 2004, stated Lorie Konish in an August 31, 2011, article in On Wall Street.

Cooper’s attorney alleges, Saleh sent him false monthly account statements while conducting unauthorized transactions and forging Cooper’s signature. That allegedly included buying unsuitable variable annuities products and selling them, then subsequently buying more unsuitable products.

Konish writes that while Saleh profited from fees and commissions from those transactions, funds in Cooper’s accounts ultimately dwindled to less than a third of the $1.86 million displayed in account statements.

It was noted in a strongly worded Aug. 26 decision, the FINRA arbitration panel concluded that Saleh intentionally misrepresented information about Cooper’s investments while making unauthorized redemptions or withdrawals.

“The panel determined that Respondent Saleh’s conduct was premeditated, egregious and unconscionable and part of a plan or scheme to defraud her customers,” the FINRA panel wrote in its decision. “Respondent Saleh’s conduct certainly borders on criminal misconduct, if not actually elevating her actions to actual criminal misconduct.”

Wedbush fought against the charges in the arbitration, arguing that the variable annuities sold to Cooper were suitable and that the firm’s supervision was adequate.

That supervision was not good enough, Cooper’s lawyer said, as the firm did not promptly respond to a Dec. 2007 letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission following an investigation on Saleh.

Saleh stepped down from her post at Wedbush in March, 2009. She was permanently barred from serving in the securities industry by FINRA in August, 2009. Her registration records show that she has also previously been named in other cases involving annuities she sold to customers.

The On Wall Street article reports that the $2.9 million award includes special damages for emotional distress, including $500,000 to be paid by Saleh, $300,000 by Wedbush and $200,000 by Wedbush Securities founder and President Edward Wedbush.

Including interest, the total award totals more than $3 million.

Securities Attorney, Lars Soreide, of Soreide Law Group, PLLC, has represented clients nationwide. If you feel you have become a victim of stock/securities loss, 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.

annuity fraud · annuity fraud lawyer · annuity scam · broker profiting from fees · Debbie Michelle Saleh · Edward W Wedbush · Edward Wedbush · elder abuse · elder abuse awareness · elder abuse by stockbrokers · elder abuse in investments · failure to supervise brokers · Financial Industry Regulatory Authority · FINRA · FINRA arbitration · finra lawyer · finra securities arbitration · finra securities arbitration lawyer · fort lauderdale securities fraud lawyer · fort lauderdale securities lawyer · Ft. Lauderdale Securities Lawyer · investment fraud · Lars Soreide · Rick Cooper FINRA award · securities arbitraton lawyer · securities fraud lawyer · Soreide Law Group PLLC · Stock fraud lawyer · stockbroker misconduct · targeting elderly investors · Unsuitable investments to elderly · unsuitable variable annuities · variable annuities · wedbush morgan securities inc · Wedbush Securites · Wedbush Securities FINRA arbitration