The Brokercheck Report further states that LPL Financial “Discharged” Mr. Tunink for “Failed to disclose and receive prior approval for loans from customers; and settled a customer complaint away from the Firm.” Mr. Tunink had been registered with LPL as a securities representative from 2021 to September 2025, and previously was registered with Avantax Investment Services from 1996 to 2021.

Financial advisors who are registered with FINRA are generally prohibited from taking loans from their customers pursuant to FINRA Rule 3240. The limited exceptions in the rule include loans from family members, loans from financial institutions, and the borrowing or lending arrangement is based on a bona fide business relationship outside of the broker-customer relationship. However, even in those limited exceptions, the representative’s FINRA firm must be notified of the loan and approve the loan.

The Securities Fraud lawyers at Greco & Greco have decades of experience representing harmed investors from across the country for claims related to improper loans and broker theft, as well as claims for suitability, securities fraud, failure to supervise, negligence, violations of Regulation Best Interest, and breach of fiduciary duty. If you have had your trusted investment advisor solicit a loan from you or otherwise wrongfully take control of your funds and savings, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.

FINRA securities brokerage firms such as Interactive Brokers have various duties under FINRA Rules and federal law to safeguard customer assets and guard against money laundering.

The U.S. Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) is set out in 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5311 – 5330. Securities Broker-Dealers such as IB are defined as a “financial institution” under the BSA. 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5312(a)(2).  “Money Laundering” is defined in 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5340 as “the movement of illicit cash or cash equivalent proceeds into, out of, or through the United States, or into, out of, or through United States financial institutions…”
The fraudulent theft of customer monies through unauthorized withdrawals/transfers by ACH or wire meets the definition of “money laundering” because it involves the movement of illicit cash through and out of United States financial institutions.
The Bank Secrecy Act requires financial institutions such as IB to develop and institute internal policies, procedures, and controls to “guard against” money laundering. Specifically, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5318(h) requires:

“(h) Anti-Money Laundering Programs.—
(1) In general.—In order to guard against money laundering through financial institutions, each financial institution shall establish anti-money laundering programs, including, at a minimum—
(A) the development of internal policies, procedures, and controls;
(B) the designation of a compliance officer;
(C) an ongoing employee training program; and
(D) an independent audit function to test programs.”

FINRA Rules require IB and other member securities firms to comply with the BSA and associated regulations, and implement appropriate policies and procedures. Specifically, FINRA Rule 3310 states: “Each member shall develop and implement a written anti-money laundering program reasonably designed to achieve and monitor the member’s compliance with the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act (31 U.S.C. 5311, et seq.), and the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder by the Department of the Treasury.” FINRA Notice to Members 02-21 also advised broker-dealers “to look for signs of suspicious activity that suggest money laundering” – or, “red flags” – and if they detect “red flags,” to “perform additional due diligence.”

Interactive Brokers was censured and fined $15,000,000.00 by FINRA in 2020 in a letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) for “deficient” Anti-Money Laundering procedures and procedures/supervision relating to money transfers. IB’s documented failures therein included the same situation as the arbitration above – “[IB] did not reasonably surveil for AML purposes outgoing wire transfers identified as “first-party” transfers (i.e., transfers where the recipient was the customer itself), because the Firm accepted customers’ designations that they were first-party wire transfers, even when the Firm learned that some purportedly “first-party” wires were, in fact, third-party wires.”

Greco & Greco has been representing harmed investors against their securities brokerage firms for over twenty-five years. If your investment firm has transferred monies from your account to criminals or scammers without your knowledge or consent, please contact Virginia Securities Fraud Lawyer Scott Greco for a free consultation about your potential case.

According to FINRA’s Brokercheck report, Mr. Trimber was terminated by Wells Fargo in February 2024 for the following reason: “Financial Advisor discharged after he admitted during review to making unauthorized transfers of client funds to recipients outside of the Firm.”

Financial Advisors occupy positions of trust and access to accounts that unfortunately can result in the theft of customer funds. In such situations, the brokerage firms for which the advisor is registered also bear responsibility for their advisors’ criminal actions, and also can be found liable for failures to supervise the wrongful activity.

The Virginia Securities Fraud Lawyers of Greco & Greco have been representing the interests of wronged customers in Virginia and across the country for over thirty years. These cases, many of which end up in FINRA arbitration, have often involved the fraudulent theft of funds by trusted financial advisors and brokers. If you believe you may have been victimized by your advisor, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

Of particular note is The Huntington Investment Company’s case, which stands out due to its self-reporting and cooperation with the SEC. As a result, Huntington was ordered to pay a lower civil penalty compared to other firms, totaling $1.25 million. This demonstrates the importance of voluntary disclosure and cooperation in regulatory investigations.

The investigations uncovered widespread use of unapproved communication methods, such as personal text messages, across all sixteen firms. Employees at various levels, including supervisors and senior managers, were involved in these violations. The failure to maintain and preserve required records potentially deprived the SEC of crucial information in various investigations.

Each of the firms involved was charged with violating recordkeeping provisions of relevant securities laws and failing to reasonably supervise to prevent and detect such violations. In addition to the financial penalties, the firms were ordered to cease future violations, receive censures, and engage independent compliance consultants to review and enhance their policies and procedures.

Most securities brokerage firms and investment advisory firms prohibit texting between financial advisors and brokers and their customers because of the difficulty of supervising those communications. The reality is, however, that many brokers and advisors don’t follow these rules and often will send texts that can be used against them and their firms in related securities fraud actions. For this reason, customers who have been damaged by the wrongdoing of their advisors should take care to preserve all communications with their advisors including texts. If you believe you may have a claim against your financial advisor, broker, or their firm, please contact securities fraud attorney Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.

Background: LPL Financial LLC

LPL Financial LLC, a long-standing member of FINRA since 1973, operates as a significant player in the securities industry and is one of the larger “independent” FINRA firms. Headquartered in Fort Mill, South Carolina, LPL boasts a considerable network, with over 27,000 registered representatives across more than 18,000 branch offices. Most advisors who are registered with independent firms operate out of small one or two advisor offices. Although independent firms have the same supervisory duties and more traditional firms with big branch offices, proper supervision does not always occur.

Overview of Allegations

The allegations against LPL Financial LLC span a significant timeframe, from January 2012 to November 2022. Among the key alleged violations cited by FINRA include the firm’s failure to reasonably supervise transactions conducted directly with product sponsors on behalf of customers. This lack of oversight led to approximately 830,000 transactions not being reported, raising concerns about potential sales practice violations and unsuitable recommendations.

Moreover, LPL’s shortcomings extended to inaccurate information provided to customers regarding switch transactions, where approximately 11,300 letters were found to contain misleading fee information. This negligence in supervision and communication not only violated FINRA rules but also compromised the interests of customers.

Furthermore, the firm failed to establish a proper supervisory system for recommendations involving publicly traded securities of business development companies (BDCs which are considered “alternative” investments), leading to potential overconcentration in Listed BDC investments for certain customers. The AWC stated: “LPL also failed to have a reasonable supervisory system to ensure the collection of information for its direct business customers’ investment profiles—such as the customers’ ages, investment time horizons, and liquidity needs—that was relevant for making suitability determinations. LPL relied on its representatives to collect such information by completing new account forms for direct business transactions. However, the firm did not take steps to ensure that representatives completed the new account forms.”

Consequences and Sanctions

In response to these violations, LPL Financial LLC has consented to several sanctions imposed by FINRA, including a censure, a substantial fine of $5.5 million, and restitution totaling $651,374.51 plus interest. Additionally, the firm is required to undertake remedial actions within a specified timeframe to address the identified issues and ensure compliance with regulatory standards.

Contact a Securities Fraud Lawyer if you may have a claim.

If you think you may have a potential claim for unsuitable investments or failure to supervise against a financial advisory firm such as LPL, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

The alleged wrongdoing centered on the language included by J.P. Morgan in its settlement agreements with its advisory and brokerage firm customers to which it paid over $1,000.00. Virtually all FINRA securities firms and Registered Investment Advisors require a confidentiality clause to be included in any settlement agreement with a customer. These settlement agreements are often the result of various misconduct by the firms or their advisors, such as securities fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, unauthorized trading, broker theft, recommended unsuitable investments, and churning. The reason why securities firms always require their settlements to be confidential is clear – they wish to hide their misconduct and the misconduct of their advisors from the public. FINRA’s Brokercheck report does require firms to disclose settlements with advisors/firms, but the details are often extremely general, and one has to look up the broker directly to find the disclosures.

According to the SEC Order, from 2020 to 2023 J.P. Morgan included language in 362 release agreements that prohibited customers not only from disclosing the amount of the settlement to the SEC, but also prohibited disclosing the facts related to the account (i.e. the misconduct). Although the releases did allow disclosure to the SEC in response to an inquiry, it did not allow the customers to initiate contact with the SEC.

These actions allegedly violated the SEC protections for securities whistleblowers, and as stated by the SEC in the Order: “JPMS willfully violated Exchange Act Rule 21F-17(a), which prohibits any person from taking any action to impede an individual from communicating directly with the Commission staff about a possible securities law violation.”

In addition to the fine, J.P.Morgan was required to advise its customers that they were allowed to contact the SEC directly.

If you were the victim of misconduct of a securities brokerage firm or financial advisor/broker resulting in the loss of your monies, please contact investment fraud attorney Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your potential case.

According to the indictment, from July 2017 through March 2021, Welsh, operating as a financial advisor registered with Wells Fargo Clearing Services, purportedly abused his position to misappropriate funds entrusted to him by clients. Instead of responsibly managing their investments, Welsh is accused of diverting substantial sums into accounts under his control, leaving his clients in financial distress. The charges carry severe penalties, with each wire fraud count potentially leading to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine, while the investment advisor fraud count could result in five years behind bars and a $10,000 fine, or twice the gross gain or loss from the offense.

The indictment details that Mr. Welsh allegedly used multiple fraudulent means to siphon off customer funds, including having customers sign forms in blank, fraudulently forging signatures, and carrying out unauthorized wires from customer accounts.

U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger emphasized the importance of maintaining trust in financial advisors, stating that investors must have confidence that their advisors will act in their best interests. The FBI, led by Special Agent in Charge James E. Dennehy, played a crucial role in investigating the case.

FINRA Broker-Dealers such as Wells Fargo have duties to supervise their registered representatives such as Mr. Welsh. They must have a reasonable supervisory system designed to follow up on red flags and prevent violations of the law such as what occurred here.

Mr. Welsh’s FINRA Brokercheck report reveals that Wells Fargo has already paid out over a million dollars in settlements of claims related to Mr. Welsh, and another multi million dollar arbitration is pending.

W. Scott Greco of the securities fraud law firm Greco & Greco, P.C. has decades of experience representing customers against their brokerage firms related to broker theft of customer funds. If you believe you may have been the victim of a fraud or theft by your trusted financial advisor, please contact securities fraud lawyer Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

Mr. Quach was allegedly under investigation by FINRA as a result of being permitted to resign “while under review by the firm for violating firm’s policy related to borrowing funds from a client.” Mr. Quach’s FINRA Brokercheck report states that he was registered with Transamerica since 2012. The report further states that he had one recent customer complaint relating to borrowed funds that settled, and that he was permitted to resign in March, 2023.

Registered financial advisors are generally prohibited from borrowing money from customers under FINRA Rule 3240 except in limited circumstances such as from a family member or other personal relationship. The loan must also be disclosed and approved by the advisor’s firm.

The reasons behind the rule include the myriad of conflicts of interest associated with an advisor recommending to a customer that they pay the advisor their funds, and further include the fact that such loans can be cover for thefts by financial advisors.

The Maryland Securities Fraud attorneys at Greco & Greco have decades of experience representing customers who have been defrauded by their financial advisors through loan schemes or actual thefts. Please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation if you may have been a victim of such a scheme.

Then, on November 15, 2022, the Maryland Securities Commissioner issued a Consent Order in which Jean admitted to fraudulent actions during his time with Morgan Stanley in Maryland. Specifically, he was found to have initiated four ACH transfers, totaling $10,182, from a Morgan Stanley customer’s brokerage account to cover his personal credit card expenses.

FINRA, a national self-regulatory securities regulator, recently barred Mr. Miche from the industry pursuant to a decision by its Office of Hearing Officers.

Securities firms such as Morgan Stanley have legal duties requiring them to reasonably supervise their brokers to attempt to prevent fraudulent and criminal activity. Greco & Greco’s local Maryland Securities Fraud Lawyers have decades of experience representing customers against securities firms and brokers for cases of investment fraud and theft by brokers. Please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation if you believe that you may have been the victim of similar misconduct.

As shown by Mr. Starke’s FINRA Brokercheck report, found here, in the last two years customers have filed seven complaints against Mr. Starke, most involving allegations of the sale of illiquid, unsuitable, and high-risk investments.

Alternative Investments, which include REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts), are often sold as an alternative to more traditional stocks, bonds, and stock and bond funds. These higher-risk investments are often touted for their high returns, especially in a low interest rate environment, however those high returns are accompanied with corresponding high risk.

In addition to their often high-risk nature, alternative investments may also have significant liquidity risk. Because they are typically not traded on an exchange, investors may not be able to determine the actual value of the investment, and further if the investment experiences problems, investors may not be able to sell or otherwise get out of the problem investment.

Pursuant to the Virginia Securities Act, financial advisors are required to disclose the risks associated with investments that are being recommended, and the Act provides for an award of rescission or losses, interest, and reasonable attorneys fees.

Prior to recommending the purchase of specific investments or a specific investment strategy to a customer, a stockbroker / financial advisor such as Mr. Starke is required to determine that the investments are suitable to that particular investor (or in the “best interest” of the customer after 2020). A suitability determination is based upon many different factors such as age, investment objectives, risk tolerance, employment situation, needs, income, assets, and investment experience. If an advisor’s recommendations of unsuitable investments result in the investor incurring significant losses, that investor may have a suitability, negligence, and breach of contract claim against the broker and his/her firm.

Generally, retirees and those on a fixed income should not have their life savings concentrated in high-risk illiquid investments due to the risk of loss as well as the difficulties of selling the investments.

Greco & Greco’s local Virginia-based lawyers have been representing Virginia residents for decades in claims against their financial advisors and brokerage firms. If you have suffered losses in unsuitable high-risk and illiquid investments and wish to discuss your potential claims with a local lawyer, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your potential case.

Greco & Greco is investigating investor losses in the following alternative investments:

• GWG L Bonds
• Moody National REIT
• Mobile Infrastructure
• Parking REIT
• Necessity Retail REIT
• American Finance Trust
• Silver Star Properties REIT
• First Capital Real Estate Trust
• Priority Income Fund
• American Hospitality Properties Fund
• Phoenix American Hospitality
• Commonwealth Capital
• Hospitality Investors Trust
• American Realty Capital Hospitality Trust

Background

The AWC against LPL Financial LLC was the result of a failure to reasonably supervise the transmittal of customer funds, which enabled two firm registered representatives to convert substantial sums of money for their personal use. The findings by FINRA in the AWC are outlined below:

1. Improper Transfers of Customer Funds: One representative persuaded nine customers, five of whom were seniors, to issue checks from their brokerage accounts payable to an undisclosed entity controlled by the representative. Instead of investing these funds, the representative used them for personal and business expenses, totaling approximately $550,000.
2. Wire Transfers for Personal Use: Another representative convinced four customers, three of whom were seniors, to wire money from their firm accounts to an outside business he controlled, purportedly for investment purposes. However, he misappropriated around $675,000 of their funds for personal use. Furthermore, this representative electronically forged a senior customer’s signature on a wire transfer form to transfer approximately $1.2 million for his personal real estate purchase.
3. Lack of Reasonable Supervisory Systems: LPL Financial LLC failed to establish a reasonable supervisory system to review transmittals of customer funds to third parties by wire or check. Their automated tool for reviewing checks only examined the second line of the recipient’s address, missing discrepancies in the address on the fourth line. Additionally, the firm did not monitor transmittals from unrelated customer accounts to the same third party.
4. Failure to Respond to Red Flags: The firm did not adequately respond to red flags indicating potential conversion/theft, such as all third-party checks being mailed to the undisclosed entity and flagged wire transfers. They also failed to detect instances of signature forgery or falsification and did not verify questionable transfers adequately.
5. Unauthorized Electronic Signatures: At least 50 firm representatives electronically signed customers’ names on over 1,000 firm documents without proper verification.

Penalties

As a result of these violations, FINRA imposed significant sanctions on LPL Financial LLC:

1. Censure: The firm was officially censured by FINRA.
2. Financial Penalty: LPL Financial LLC was fined a substantial amount of $3,000,000.00.
3. Restitution: The firm was ordered to pay $100,000 plus interest in restitution to affected customers who suffered financial losses due to the actions of the two representatives.
4. Remediation and Supervision: LPL Financial LLC must undertake a review to identify and rectify any additional improper transfers of customer funds, establish a supervisory system designed to monitor customer fund transmittals and electronic signatures to ensure compliance with securities laws and FINRA rules.

This disciplinary action against LPL Financial LLC underscores the importance of robust supervisory systems, diligent monitoring, and quick response to red flags.

Here are some key takeaways for FINRA securities firms:

1. Enhance Supervision: FINRA Broker-Dealers must implement robust supervisory systems that can detect and prevent unauthorized transfers of customer funds.
2. Vigilance with Red Flags: Red flags indicating potential misconduct should never be ignored. Firms must respond promptly and thoroughly investigate any suspicious activity.
3. Authentication and Verification: Verification procedures for electronic signatures and fund transfers must be stringent to prevent forgery and misappropriation.
4. Regular Audits and Reviews: Regularly audit and review transactions and documents to ensure compliance and prevent unauthorized actions.

Greco & Greco’s securities fraud lawyers have extensive experience pursuing legal recovery of monies stolen by customers’ financial advisors. Although criminal advisors may not be able to repay the monies they have stolen, their securities firms bear responsibility for the fraud and theft under multiple legal theories. This includes liability by the firm’s for the actions of their agents related to investments, as well as direct liability by the firms for supervisory failures and failures to follow up on red flags as discussed herein. If you have been defrauded by your financial advisor or firm, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.

The investigation allegedly was initiated in response to a Uniform Termination Notice for Securities Industry Registration (Form U5), reporting Carpenter’s discharge from his firm, LPL Financial. The Form U5 stated that LPL was reviewing Carpenter’s “alleged participation in unapproved real estate investments with customers.”

Mr. Carpenter’s FINRA Brokercheck report states that he was registered with LPL in Charlotte from 2020 to 2023, and prior to that he was registered with Spire Securities.

If you have lost money as a result of real estate investments associated with Mr. Carpenter or LPL, please contact W. Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your potential case. Greco & Greco has decades of experience representing harmed investors in cases of high risk real estate and other investments, as well as cases of securities fraud and investment fraud.

The Brokercheck report also states that Western International discharged Mr. Kennedy in 2021 after allegations were made about unauthorized options trading.

Mr. Kennedy was registered with Western at a branch office in Woodland Hills, California and Tarzana, California.

The securities fraud attorneys at Greco & Greco have extensive experience arbitrating claims on behalf of customers against Western International. One can also read here about a recent FINRA action against Western International regarding supervisory failures in the sale of GWG L bonds by Western brokers, and another related to non traded REIT sales.

If you have lost money as a result of unauthorized trading or unsuitable options trading by your financial advisor, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case. We have represented wronged customers from California and across the country for decades.

Mr. Matalon’s FINRA Brokercheck report lists a criminal charge, as well as a customer complaint seeking $2,500,000 in damages. The Brokercheck description of the customer complaint references allegations of conversion of funds from the now deceased customer.

Firms that employ securities salespersons can be held liable for the conversion (theft) of customer funds even if the firm claims that its supervisors were not aware of the theft. Please read here about broker theft and failure to supervise. If you were a victim of a financial advisor who stole funds from your accounts or investments, please contact our securities fraud lawyers for a free consultation about your case.

According to the AWC, Mr. Smith borrowed money in five different loans from a single customer without advising his firm about the loans. Loans from customers to stock brokers are generally prohibited unless they fall into several limited exceptions such as when the customer is a family member. The loans were allegedly discovered when the customer died and the estate raised questions about the loans. Mr. Smith subsequently resigned from Edward Jones while under investigation.

The FINRA AWC imposed a year suspension on the financial advisor, and a $10,000 fine.

Greco & Greco has previously recovered funds for multiple customers who knowingly or unknowingly were involved in loans to the financial advisors in violation of industry rules and brokerage firm policies. In some situations advisors may attempt to cover up broker theft from customers through the use of claimed loans. If you or someone you know was a victim of such misconduct, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

Mr. Craffy’s Brokercheck report from FINRA discloses that he was discharged by Monmouth for failing to “disclose Outside Business Activity.” It also states that he has one customer complaint pending with allegations of negligence, fraud, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty.

The FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent states that Mr. Craffy failed to appear to testify regarding his “potential conversion of customer money, loans or gifts from customers, active trading in customer accounts, and failure to fully disclose certain outside business activities.” He was barred from associating with any FINRA member in all capacities.

The Washington Post has reported that Mr. Craffy allegedly lost large amounts of monies paid in life insurance proceeds to grieving Army families.

FINRA advisors such as Mr. Craffy are required to invest customer monies in a suitable manner that is in the best interest of the customer, and in a manner that complies with the level of risk appropriate for the customer. If you are a victim of Mr. Craffy or any other broker who has lost monies as a result of the wrongdoing of the broker, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

REITs – Real Estate Investment Trusts – are investment companies that invest in a portfolio of various real estate properties. A non traded REIT is not traded on any exchange, and often is illiquid with no short term method of selling the investment.

FINRA charged Western with failing to implement and follow a reasonable supervisory system to ensure that REIT sales were suitable for the customers to whom they were recommended. Although Western had a REIT suitability form, they system did not require supervisors approving sales to review important suitability information from new account forms such as age, objectives, risk tolerance, income, etc.

The letter of Acceptance Waiver and Consent (AWC) further discussed the extreme misconduct of an unnamed Western advisor who sold REITs to a majority of his customers, including those with limited financial resources and investment experience. Several significant facts were disclosed in the AWC which should have, but didn’t, trigger supervisory action, included the fact that 19 of the 59 customers sold the REITs were 60 years old or older, many were recommended to switch from variable annuities to REITs, and in some years 90% of the broker’s commissions were from REIT sales.

Western agreed to a public censure, a $400,000 fine, and restitution payments of $471,401.57.

Non-traded REITs are often considered speculative high risk investments, and as such they would not be suitable for many customers who could not afford to take the associated risks, such as senior citizens, retirees, and those on a fixed income. If you have lost money in unsuitable REITs, or if you are unable to sell or exit a REIT that is unsuitable, please contact our securities fraud lawyers for a free consultation about your case. These unsuitable sales can support a FINRA arbitration claim based on securities fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence.

The AWC discussed the fact that Janney’s supervisory system red flagged these concentrations, but Janney “failed to take reasonable steps to understand the potential risks and rewards.”

In addition to being censured by FINRA, Janney was fined $100,000 and ordered to pay restitution to the customers that had not yet received restitution in the total amount of $145,019.

Concentration of customer accounts in one sector such as energy, or in multiple master limited partnerships (MLPs), can result in an unsuitable risk in customer accounts, and also may violate Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI). Firms such as Janney are required to have in place reasonable systems to supervise their advisors and accounts to attempt to prevent such violations.

If you have lost monies resulting from unsuitable overconcentration in a single sector, in oil and gas, or in unsuitable MLPs, we may be able to help. Please contact our securities fraud lawyers at Greco & Greco for a free attorney consultation.

The letter alleges that Mr. Turley has been registered with J.P. Morgan Securities LLC since 2009, and that he was terminated by J.P. Morgan in 2021 for “[l]oss of confidence concerning adherence to firm policies and brokerage order handling requirements.” According to FINRA, Mr. Turley has had five FINRA multi-million dollar arbitrations filed in 2020 – 2021 relating to allegations regarding sales practice violations and unsuitable trading. One of these resulted in an arbitration award.

Mr. Turley apparently refused to provide on the record testimony to FINRA in response to a Rule 8210 Request.

Investors who lost money as a result of wrongful conduct (including unsuitable trades, unauthorized trades, or churning) at J.P. Morgan or other firms should contact securities attorney W. Scott Greco for a free consultation about your potential case. Greco & Greco, Securities Fraud Lawyers, represent harmed investors across the country in cases against their financial advisors and firms.

Mr. Liddle’s FINRA Brokercheck states that Mr. Liddle was permitted to resign after allegations that he took GWG investment monies and deposited them in a Prosper Wealth Management Account. The Brokercheck further lists five customer complaints alleging the stealing of assets and issuance of promissory notes.

Greco & Greco has extensive experience representing customers of financial advisors across the country who steal funds and assets and/or borrow monies from customers. Please contact W. Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation if you believe you may be a victim of Mr. Liddle or other advisors who engaged in wrongful conduct.

Greco & Greco’s Wisconsin Investment Fraud page.