Category Archives: Featured Investigations

dice

Broker Barred by FINRA for Excessive Trading in Client IRA Accounts

By | Blog, Featured Investigations | No Comments

Released March 2017

Richard Gomez (CRD #4727721, Jackson Heights, New York) submitted an AWC in which he was suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for one year.  In light of Gomez’s financial status, no monetary sanction has been imposed. Without admitting or denying the findings, Gomez consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he engaged in several types of misconduct in the Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) of three of his member firm’s customers. The findings stated that without obtaining prior written authorization from two of these customers—who are husband and wife and senior investors—and without the firm’s acceptance of the customers’ IRAs as discretionary accounts, Gomez effected discretionary trades in these customers’ IRAs. Gomez failed to discuss the trades with the customers on the dates of the transactions. The findings also stated that Gomez’s trading in these accounts was excessive. The turnover and cost-to-equity ratios far exceeded the thresholds indicating excessive trading. Further, the strategy was inconsistent with the investment objective of capital preservation and a moderate to moderately aggressive risk tolerance that the customers expected for their respective IRAs. Nevertheless, Gomez’s trading in these IRAs resulted in losses of approximately $213,000 for the customers and generated approximately $483,400 in commissions.

The findings also included that Gomez executed transactions in a third customer’s IRA, who is also a senior investor, that were part of a qualitatively unsuitable trading strategy. The transactions that Gomez effected in this customer’s IRA resulted in market losses, and commissions and fees totaling nearly $30,000. The customer learned that Gomez was not implementing the trading strategy that they had agreed upon when he began to receive trade confirmations in the mail. The customer immediately complained to Gomez and the firm, and instructed Gomez to stop effecting any transactions in his IRA. Gomez’s trading in this customer’s IRA was unsuitable for the customer because the investment strategy in the IRA was inconsistent with the customer’s expectations and his directions to Gomez regarding the strategy that Gomez promised to implement in the account. The investment strategy was also inconsistent with the customer’s moderately aggressive risk tolerance and growth investment objectives, which were reflected in the customer’s new account documents for the firm. Instead, the strategy concentrated the customer’s assets in a single security at a time, so a negative performance in the security would have drastic effects on the IRA value. Gomez also effected transactions in the customer’s IRA without his authorization, knowledge or consent.

FINRA found that as a result of the customer’s complaint regarding his trading activity in his IRA, Gomez executed an agreement in which he agreed to repay to the customer, in an installment plan, the commissions of $9,186 generated from Gomez’s trading in his IRA. Gomez proposed the dates and amounts for repayment that were incorporated in the agreement. However, Gomez never intended to honor the terms of the agreement. Without providing any explanation, Gomez failed to make the first required payment. Gomez also failed to make subsequent payments, despite repeated promises to the customer and the firm’s management that he would do so. On at least two occasions, the firm withheld Gomez’s commission payments in order to make partial payments to the customer. By the agreement’s deadline for Gomez to fulfill his obligations pursuant to the agreement, the customer had received approximately a third of the amount due to him under the agreement, largely through the firm’s intervention. By that point, Gomez had resigned from the firm, had ceased to make any payments under the agreement, and had stopped responding in any way to the customer’s requests for payment. Gomez did not have any reasonable justification or excuse for his failure to comply with the agreement. The suspension is in effect from February 6, 2017, through February 5, 2018. (FINRA Case #2014039358003)

Source: FINRA, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 2017
Full Disciplinary Reports Available to the public at: www.finra.org

misrepresentation-omission-material-facts

FINRA Barred Broker for Private Securities Transactions Related to Unregistered Bonds

By | Blog, Broker Misconduct, Featured Investigations, Private Placements, Regulator Disciplinary Actions | No Comments

Released February 2017

 

Thomas Joseph Vilord (CRD #4261608, Sewell, New Jersey) submitted an AWC in which he was barred from association with any FINRA member in any capacity. Without admitting or denying the findings, Vilord consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he participated in undisclosed private securities transactions involving more than $347,500 in unregistered corporate debenture notes sold to customers of his member firm. The findings stated that Vilord assisted these customers in making the investments by, among other things, preparing transaction paperwork and providing the customers with information about the company issuing the notes. Vilord did not give prior notice, oral or written, to his firm that he would be participating in the offering. The findings also stated that Vilord lacked a reasonable basis to recommend the notes because he failed to conduct adequate due diligence on the offering. Vilord’s knowledge of the company was limited to his conversations with the company’s owner, information contained on the company’s website and Google searches. Although Vilord was familiar with some sources of the company’s revenue, he did not know actual revenue and debt amounts, and failed to review the company’s financial statements. The findings also included that Vilord willfully failed to timely disclose customer complaints related to the sales on his Form U4 and made false statements about one complaint in a Form U4 filing. FINRA found that Vilord provided false statements regarding the same complaint in his written response to FINRA’s request for information and documents concerning the offering and a customer’s complaint. (FINRA Case #2013037385001)

 

Source: FINRA, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 2017
Full Disciplinary Reports Available to the public at: www.finra.org

SEC

NOTICE TO MORGAN STANLEY CLIENTS: Klayman & Toskes, P.A. Announces Investigation of Morgan Stanley Following $8 Million in SEC Fines for Exchange Traded Fund Violations

By | Exhanged Traded Funds, Featured Investigations, FINRA Sales Practice Violations, SEC Disciplinary Actions, Securities Arbitration | No Comments

New York, NY — February 21, 2017 – The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes, P.A.,(K&T) www.nasd-law.com, announces an investigation into sales practice violations by Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) following $8 million in fines levied by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) related to Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs).

On February 14, 2017, the SEC imposed a Cease and Desist Order and Remedial Actions against Morgan Stanley for sales practice violations related to recommended investments in single-inverse ETFs for advisory clients in non-discretionary accounts.  According to Morgan Stanley compliance procedures, recommended investments in single-inverse ETFS had two requirements:

  • Advisory clients were required to sign Client Disclosure Notices which detailed the risks associated with the investment; and
  • Morgan Stanley supervisors were required to review the risky transactions for suitability based on client profile.

The SEC examination determined deficiencies were found in the supervisory procedures related to record keeping and the determination of “suitability” in advisory clients’ non-discretionary accounts.  No Client Disclosure Notices were signed for these risky transactions for nearly 44% of the non-discretionary advisory accounts at Morgan Stanley.  The supervisory review was considered “deficient or non-existent” for advisory clients who did not have a signed Client Disclosure Notice.

The sole purpose of this release is to investigate Morgan Stanley’s sales practices related to single-inverse exchange traded funds, which were supposed to be monitored on a daily basis and only considered suitable as a part of a hedging strategy. Morgan Stanley’s sales practice violations may include misrepresentations and omissions of material facts, conflicts of interest, unsuitable investment advice, and the failure to supervise financial advisor recommendations concerning these risky transactions. Current and former Morgan Stanley customers who have information about the firm’s sales practices are encouraged to contact Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. or Raymond Gentile, Esq. of Klayman & Toskes, P.A.  at (888) 997-9956, or visit our website at www.nasd-law.com.

About Klayman & Toskes, P.A.

K&T is a leading national securities law firm which practices exclusively in the field of securities arbitration and litigation, on behalf of retail and institutional investors throughout the world in large and complex securities matters. The firm represents high net-worth, ultra-high-net-worth, and institutional investors, such as non-profit organizations, unions, public and multi-employer pension funds. K&T has office locations in California, Florida, New York and Puerto Rico.

Destination:  http://nasd-law.com/notice-to-morgan-stanley-clients-klayman-toskes-p-a-announces-investigation-of-morgan-stanley-following-8-million-in-sec-fines-for-exchange-traded-fund-violations/

Contact:

Klayman & Toskes, P.A.

Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq.

Raymond Gentile, Esq.

Toll Free: (888)-997-9956

Email: info@nasd-law.com

 

wall-street

NOTICE TO WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE CLIENTS: Klayman & Toskes, P.A. Launches Investigation into Wells Fargo Advisors’ Envision Investment Analysis Tool, Following $1 Million FINRA Fine for Failing to Supervise Client Presentation Reports

By | Blog, Featured Investigations | No Comments

New York, NY  – December 16, 2016 — The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes, P.A. (“K&T”), www.nasd-law.com, has launched an investigation into Wells Fargo Advisors, a wholly-owned brokerage dealer of Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC), for Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sales practice violations for failing to supervise client presentation reports, including those generated by the firm’s Envision investment analysis tool.

On December 5, FINRA accepted from Wells Fargo Advisors an Acceptance Waiver and Consent for $1 million in fines for “failing to establish a supervisory system reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations regarding the use and dissemination to customers of the [Wells Fargo Advisors’ client presentation report] Application”, which included assets “held away from the firms.”  According to FINRA, Wells Fargo Advisors’ “representatives were permitted to manually enter information regarding customers’ external accounts, assets and liabilities” into a centralized database maintained by the brokerage firm.  During the period from June 2009 and June 2015, more than 5 million reports were generated from the firm’s most popular client report system.

According to K&T, “Wells Fargo Advisors’ representatives who utilized Envision Presentation reports, in order to dispense financial advice may have violated FINRA sales practice rules and regulations.”  K&T is investigating potential sales practice violations from Wells Fargo Advisors’ use of the Envision Presentation report program, in conjunction with unsuitable investment strategies and recommendations.  Customers may have retired too early and/or taken undue risks with retirement plan proceeds as a result of unrealistic assumptions.  Wells Fargo Advisors may have failed to supervise the financial planning advice provided to its customers, while at the same time creating incentive programs for its advisors that encouraged behavior that was contrary to their customers’ best interest.

 

nyse

NOTICE TO MERRILL LYNCH PUERTO RICO BOND AND BOND FUND INVESTORS: Klayman & Toskes, P.A. Continues to Investigate FINRA Arbitration Claims against Merrill Lynch for its Margin Lending Practices Related to Concentrated Investments in Puerto Rico Bonds and Bond Funds

By | Blog, Featured Investigations | No Comments

San Juan, Puerto Rico–December 5, 2016.  The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes, P.A. (“K&T”), www.nasd-law.com, continues to investigate FINRA arbitration claims against Merrill Lynch, a subsidy of Bank of America, N.A. (NYSE:BAC), for its margin lending practices related to concentrated investments in Puerto Rico bonds and leveraged closed-end bond funds (CEBFs). The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently fined Merrill Lynch $6.25 million for failure to supervise the recommended use of borrowed funds to invest in securities. Additionally, Merrill Lynch agreed to “pay roughly $780,000 in restitution to 22 customers who had 75% or more of their assets invested in Puerto Rico bonds and funds and suffered huge losses trying to liquidate them to meet margin calls.”  K&T is currently investigating the sales practices of Merrill Lynch’s for violations related to unsuitable concentration in Puerto Rico bonds and leveraged CEBFs.

K&T’s investigation focuses on recommendations by Merrill Lynch to use loans secured by their Puerto Rico bonds and leveraged CEBFs. Recommendations to use borrowed funds to invest in Puerto Rico bonds and leveraged CEBFs resulted in undue risks for investors with moderate to conservative risk tolerances.  Merrill Lynch investors suffered greater losses and margin calls from the use of borrowed funds provided by their parent company, Bank of America, N.A.

The sole purpose of this release is to investigate sales practice violations by Merrill Lynch on behalf of our clients. The sales practice violations may include unsuitable investment recommendationsmargin calls, conflicts of interestmisrepresentations and omissions of material facts and a failure to supervise.   Merrill Lynch customers who have information about the sales practices of the firm related to concentrated investments in Puerto Rico bonds, CEBFs through borrowed funds provided by Bank of America, N.A. are encouraged to contact Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. or Steven D. Toskes, Esq. of Klayman & Toskes, P.A.  at (787)-919-7325, or visit our website at www.perdidasenbonospr.com/en/.

Compliance_Rules

NOTICE TO MERRILL LYNCH CUSTOMERS – Klayman & Tokses, P.A. Announces Investigation into Merrill Lynch Loan Management Accounts in Light of FINRA Sanctions for $7 Million in Fines and Restitution Regarding US and Puerto Rico Clients

By | Blog, Featured Investigations, FINRA Disciplinary Actions, FINRA Sales Practice Violations | No Comments

New York, NY – December 1, 2016 — The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes, P.A. (“K&T”), www.nasd-law.com, announces an investigation into Merrill Lynch, a wholly owned brokerage firm of Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), for Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sales practice violations from its Loan Management Accounts (LMAs) following FINRA regulatory fines.  Yesterday, FINRA accepted from Merrill Lynch an Acceptance Waiver and Consent for $6.25 million in fines and approximately $780,000 in restitution to Puerto Rico customers, for inadequately supervising the use of Merrill Lynch loans for customer accounts.  According to FINRA, Merrill Lynch brokerage accounts received proceeds transferred from LMAs and purchased millions of dollars in securities, the majority being purchased on margin, within 14 days of the transfer.  FINRA concluded that these supervisory failures occurred from January 2010 to November 2014.

According to K&T founder, Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. “The use of brokerage account assets as collateral for these loans greatly increased the risks assumed by Merrill Lynch customers.”    Mr. Klayman explains, “Our firm is investigating sales practice violations by Merrill Lynch for failure to supervise its financial advisors’ recommendations to customers concerning the use of LMA proceeds to purchase stock on margin.  Merrill Lynch’s advice to use margin loans signals a potential conflict of interest, which increased commissions for their financial advisors at the expense of customers who did not fully understand the risks associated with these loans.”

The sole purpose of this release is in furtherance of our investigation into Merrill Lynch’s sales practices related to Loan Management Accounts (LMAs) which may include violations for unsuitable recommendationsmargin abuse, breach of fiduciary dutymisrepresentations and omissions of material facts and a failure to supervise.   Current and former Merrill Lynch customers who have information about the sales practices of Bank of America and its brokerage firm, Merrill Lynch are encouraged to contact Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. or Raymond Gentile, Esq. of Klayman & Toskes, P.A.  at (888) 997-9956, or visit our website at www.nasd-law.com.

electronic-stock-board-medium

FINRA Fines Broker for Excessive Commissions from Risky Trading Strategies

By | Blog, Featured Investigations | No Comments

Released November 2016

Lucas Dylan Lichtman (CRD #5542092, Nanuet, New York) submitted an Offer of Settlement in which he was assessed a deferred fine of $7,500 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for nine months. Without admitting or denying the allegations, Lichtman consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he made unsuitable recommendations of an active trading investment strategy to his customer. The findings stated that Lichtman recommended that his customer engage in the unsuitable active trading investment strategy, despite the fact that he failed to understand the risks of the investment strategy being recommended, or the impact the staggering commissions and fees generated by this active trading investment strategy would have on his customer’s account. Lichtman did not have any reasonable basis to recommend such a strategy to his customer. As a result of the recommendations Lichtman and other representatives of his member firm made, 15 customer accounts paid over $1 million in commissions and fees.

Additionally, Lichtman did not know how to calculate or even understand cost-to-equity ratios and turnover rates, which are standard industry metrics used to measure whether an account is being excessively traded. Lichtman did not understand the impact of trading and costs on his customer’s account and on the specific transactions recommended as part of an investment strategy. Lichtman did not conduct any due diligence into the active trading investment strategy he was recommending, and he never reviewed his customer’s account, either individually or collectively, to determine if the active trading investment strategy was successful or suitable for his customer. Lichtman failed to perform any analysis of the active trading investment strategy’s costs, risks, potential benefits, volatility, or likely performance in a variety of market and economic conditions. The active trading investment strategy Lichtman recommended was not in the customer’s best interest.

The suspension is in effect from October 3, 2016, through July 2, 2017. (FINRA Case #2014039091903)

Source: FINRA, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 2016
Full Disciplinary Reports Available to the public at: www.finra.org

 

dollars-in-chains

FINRA Fines Broker $219,000 for Private Placement Violations

By | Featured Investigations, FINRA Disciplinary Actions | No Comments

Thomas Edward Brenner Jr. (CRD #1489233, Orrville, Ohio) submitted an AWC in which he was assessed a deferred fine of $30,000, suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for 16 months, and ordered to pay deferred disgorgement of commissions of $189,000, plus interest. Without admitting or denying the findings, Brenner consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he engaged in two separate private placements which were rife with supervisory and substantive violations.  The findings stated that in soliciting customers to purchase a private placement offering, Brenner provided customers with a private placement memorandum (PPM) for the offering and a program summary, the latter of which provided a brief summary of the offering. Both the PPM and the program summary contained several statements that claimed or implied that the investments were secured, or suggested a level of safety in the investments or reliability in forecasting returns by investors.

The findings also stated that in soliciting investors for another offering, Brenner provided each investor with an application form, a subscription agreement, a promissory note and an executive summary generally describing the offering. At various times while Brenner was soliciting investors in this offering, a founder of the offering told Brenner that a PPM was forthcoming. But, the PPM was not completed until after FINRA’s investigation of the offering began and well after Brenner had ceased soliciting investors. Hence, the PPM

was not provided to investors. By distributing a variety of documents to investors in each offering, Brenner negligently made untrue statements of material facts or omitted to state material facts necessary to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, and made statements which were not fair and balanced, and were misleading, exaggerated and unwarranted.

The findings also included that Brenner’s member firm’s WSPs designated him as the principal responsible for ensuring compliance with all procedures relating to private placements, including the due diligence requirements. Brenner, however, was not aware that he was the designated principal under the WSPs and did not have any experience in supervising private placements. Despite the express references in the firm’s WSPs to due diligence requirements for private placements, neither Brenner nor anyone else at the firm conducted the diligence the firm’s WSPs required. Brenner assumed that another principal of the firm had conducted the due diligence of one of the offerings. However, that principal was unaware of the offering and did not conduct any due diligence. Brenner’s review of the offering was limited to talking with the offering’s founder and discussing its business plan with a few people in the medical or pharmaceutical industries for the purpose of understanding the market demand for the self-owned toxicology laboratories.

The suspension is in effect from August 15, 2016, through December 14, 2017.

(FINRA Case #2015046056403)

Source: FINRA, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 2016
Full Disciplinary Reports Available to the public at: www.finra.org

Pedestrian Next to Electronic Board - Medium

NOTICE TO CURRENT AND FORMER WELLS FARGO EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS – Klayman & Tokses, P.A. Continues to Investigate Wells Fargo Cross Selling Incentive Programs Following Regulatory Probes

By | Featured Investigations | No Comments

New York, NY – November 4, 2016 — The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes, P.A. (“K&T”), www.nasd-law.com, continues to inv estigate Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC) and its broker dealer, Wells Fargo Advisors, for potential Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sales practice violations from its“cross selling” incentive  programs.  Yesterday, Wells Fargo reported in its SEC 10-Q filing, “the United States Department of Justice and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and state attorneys general and prosecutors’ offices, as well as Congressional committees, have undertaken formal or informal inquiries, investigations or examinations arising out of certain sales practices of the Company that were the subject of settlements” with regulators for $185 million on September 8, 2016.

The federal probes conducted by the SEC and other regulators is followed by Wells Fargo’s reported increase in reserves for potential litigation losses to $1.7 billion.  According to K&T founder, Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. “Wells Fargo’s legal problems are focused on sales practices from cross selling incentive programs that violated financial industry rules and regulations.”  Mr. Klayman emphasizes, “Our firm is investigating potential sales practice violations which placed current and former employees, as well as customers of Wells Fargo in harm’s way.  Wells Fargo failed to meet its obligations to promote an ethical workplace which placed the Company’s pursuit of profits before their customers’ best interests.  Wells Fargo failed to supervise the ‘cross selling’ activities which violated financial industry rules and regulations.”

The sole purpose of this release is in furtherance of our investigation into Wells Fargo’s sales practices related to “cross-selling” efforts which may include; unsuitable recommendationsbreach of fiduciary dutymisrepresentations and omissions of material facts and a failure to supervise.   Current and former Wells Fargo employees and customers who have information about the sales practices of Wells Fargo and Wells Fargo Advisors are encouraged to contact Lawrence L. Klayman, Esq. or Raymond Gentile, Esq. of Klayman & Toskes, P.A.  at (888) 997-9956, or visit our website at www.nasd-law.com.

SEC Whistleblowers

Individuals, including current or former employees with non-public information regarding Wells Fargo and Wells Fargo Advisors sales practices related to cross selling programs should consider the SEC Whistleblower Program. Under the SEC Whistleblower program, whistleblowers who provide unique information that results in an SEC enforcement action with sanctions exceeding $1 million, and awards can range from 10 percent to 30 percent of the money collected in a case.

About Klayman & Toskes, P.A.

K&T is a leading national securities law firm which practices exclusively in the field of securities arbitration and litigation, on behalf of retail and institutional investors throughout the world in large and complex securities matters. The firm represents high net-worth, ultra-high-net-worth, and institutional investors, such as non-profit organizations, unions, public and multi-employer pension funds. K&T has office locations in California, Florida, New York and Puerto Rico.

 

Compliance-regulations

FINRA Fines Eight Firms a Total of $6.2 Million for Supervisory Failures Related to Variable Annuity L-Shares

By | Blog, Featured Investigations | No Comments

Released November 2, 2016

WASHINGTON — The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced today that it has fined eight firms, including VOYA Financial Advisors, five broker-dealer subsidiaries of Cetera Financial Group, Kestra Investment Services, LLC, and FTB Advisors, Inc., a total of $6.2 million for failing to supervise sales of variable annuities (VAs). FINRA also ordered five of the firms to pay more than $6 million to customers who purchased L-share variable annuities with potentially incompatible, complex and expensive long-term minimum-income and withdrawal riders.

FINRA imposed sanctions against the following firms.

FINRA ordered the firms to pay the following to investors.

  • Voya was ordered to pay at least $1.8 million to customers in this category.
  • Cetera Advisors Networks, First Allied, Summit Brokerage Services and VSR were collectively ordered to pay customers at least $4.5 million.

The L-share VAs at the heart of this action are complex investment products combining insurance and security features designed for short-term investors willing to pay higher fees in exchange for shorter surrender periods. L-shares also had the potential to pay greater compensation to the firms and registered representatives than more traditional share classes. Each of the firms in this action lacked an adequate system to supervise variable annuities with multiple share classes, and failed to provide its registered representatives and principals with reasonable guidance regarding the narrow class of customers for whom the costs and features of L-share variable annuities were suitable.

These failures were compounded by the fact that the short-surrender L-Shares were often sold with complex and expensive guaranteed income and withdrawal riders that provided benefits only over longer holding periods.

FINRA found that VOYA and four of the Cetera Group firms failed to identify “red flags” of broad patterns of potentially unsuitable sales of this product combination.

Brad Bennett, FINRA Executive Vice President and Chief of Enforcement, said, “The complexity and expense of variable annuities require exceptional diligence in the training and supervision of the representatives who sell them and of the sales themselves. When a firm cannot explain why a significant number of clients are paying up for the short-term flexibility of L-shares while at the same time buying riders that only have value over the long term, it is clear that these supervisory obligations are not being met.”

These actions also included additional violations by Voya, Cetera Advisors Networks, Cetera Financial Specialists and VSR for failure to monitor rates of variable annuity exchanges at their respective firms.

First Allied was further found to have failed in its supervision of the sale of structured products and non-traditional exchange-traded funds. Lastly, First Allied and Kestra permitted the use of consolidated statements by their registered representatives without proper oversight.

In settling these matters, the firms neither admitted nor denied the charges, but consented to the entry of FINRA’s findings.

Source: FINRA, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 2016
Full Disciplinary Reports Available to the public at: www.finra.org

Do you have a question or need more information? Get in touch with us