ALEXANDER INVESTMENT SERVICES CO. was censured and fined $25,000.00 as part of a settlement with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). Their main office location is in Louisville, Kentucky.
Without admitting or denying FINRA’s findings, ALEXANDER INVESTMENT SERVICES consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that it allegedly failed to comply with Reg BI’s compliance and conflict of interest obligations.
FINRA’s findings stated that ALEXANDER INVESTMENT SERVICES’ written policies and procedures allegedly contained no provisions specifically relating to the obligations set forth in Reg BI.
ALEXANDER INVESTMENT SERVICES later updated its policies and procedures, which remain in effect, but they discuss Reg BI only in general terms, without addressing conflicts of interest or Reg BI’s specific requirements for acting in the best interest of retail customers, according to the FINRA report.
The report goes on to say that ALEXANDER INVESTMENT SERVICES’ WSPS (Written Supervisory Procedures) do not designate the principal responsible for Reg BI compliance or detail the supervisory steps and reviews that should be undertaken by that principal, including the frequency of those reviews or how such reviews should be conducted or evidenced.
The date initiated and the date of resolution was October 20, 2025. The firm was censured and fined $25,000.00.
The SEC's Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 establishes a "best interest" standard of conduct for broker/dealers and associated persons when they make a recommendation to a retail customer of any securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities, including recommendations of types of accounts. According to the SEC, investment advisers, broker/dealers, and their financial professionals need to understand the investments and investment strategies on which they provide advice and recommendations before advising on or recommending them to retail investors. This includes developing a sufficient understanding of the potential risks, rewards, and costs of the investment or investment strategy to have a reasonable basis to believe that the recommendation or advice could be in a retail investor’s best interest. Without this understanding, firms and their financial professionals cannot have a reasonable basis to believe that their recommendation or advice aligns with a retail investor’s investment profile in a way that satisfies their obligations to make a recommendation or provide advice that is in the specific investor’s best interest.
To discuss this article or any other securities issues contact Soreide Law Group and speak to an experienced securities lawyer at no cost: 888-760-6552.
Soreide Law Group represents clients nationwide before FINRA.
The private market, once the exclusive playground of institutional investors, has increasingly opened its doors to individual investors seeking a piece of the next unicorn. Funds like the Advanced Technology Select Funds - targeting high-profile private companies such as Flexport, Plaid, and Cybereason - are a prime example of this trend. While the prospect of […]
Soreide Law Group, PLLC At Soreide Law Group, we help investors, shareholders, and publicly traded companies navigate the complex federal rules governing the resale of restricted or control securities. Our attorneys understand that clearing restrictive legends and ensuring compliance with Rule 144 or other resale exemptions can be time-sensitive and critical to protecting shareholder rights. […]
FINRA barred securities broker Emma Marie McAuley [CRD: 7178199, Auburn, Washington], based on disclosures on Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) BrokerCheck. Evidently, McAuley worked for Edward Jones from November 4, 2019, to March 19, 2024. Keep reading to learn more about McAuley’s disclosures. FINRA Sanctioned McAuley For Failure To Respond Notably, on January 21, 2025, […]
Phone:
Fax: 1-954-760-6553
Email: info@securitieslawyer.com