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.

FINRA states “Pursuant to FINRA Rule 9552(h) and in accordance with FINRA’s Notice of Suspension and Suspension from Association letters dated June 2, 2023, and June 26, 2023, respectively, on September 5, 2023, Wilhelm is barred from association with any FINRA member firm in all capacities. Wilhelm failed to request termination of his suspension within three months of the date of the Notice of Suspension; therefore he is automatically barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities.”

The Virginia-based securities fraud lawyers at Greco & Greco have been representing wronged customers of financial advisors for decades, including many clients from southwest Virginia including Roanoke. We have extensive experience for cases of securities fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, churning, broker theft, false statements, unsuitable recommendations, and unauthorized trading. If you believe you may have been victimized by your investment advisor, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.

Unauthorized trading by investment advisors is generally considered to be a fraudulent activity. Typically, unless discretion to trade without speaking to the customer is granted to the broker in writing, the broker is required to obtain permission for all transactions for the customer after discussing the relevant factors which form the basis for a recommended trade.

Greco & Greco has represented North Carolina investors for decades in FINRA arbitrations based on wrongful conduct by stock brokers and their brokerage firms. If you believe you may have been harmed by a broker’s bad acts, please contact Securities Fraud Lawyer Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

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.

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.

According to the SEC Order, between February 2017 and August 2021, BAM, under Bruderman’s direction, persuaded at least thirteen investment advisory clients to invest substantial amounts totaling $6.1 million in entities where Bruderman had significant ownership and decision-making authority. Shockingly, these clients were not informed that their investments would temporarily be diverted to cover expenses unrelated to their intended investments or to repay loans made by Bruderman himself.

One particularly concerning example involved a $500,000 equity investment, where $400,000 was transferred to Bruderman’s personal bank account to repay a loan owed by one of the entities. The clients invested based on BAM’s advice, unaware of the temporary diversion of their funds. Despite BAM’s written policies requiring disclosure of material conflicts of interest, these conflicts remained undisclosed, leaving clients in the dark about the use of their investments.

The SEC found BAM and Bruderman in violation of the Advisers Act, specifically Sections 206(2) and 206(4), and Rule 206(4)-7. As part of the settlement, BAM and Bruderman have voluntarily repaid certain debts to investment advisory clients, totaling $1,650,000, and further were required to pay a $250,000 civil penalty.

This SEC order serves as a stern reminder of the regulatory responsibilities that investment advisers bear towards their clients. Misuse of customer funds and failure to disclose conflicts of interest are serious violations that can result in substantial penalties. Greco & Greco’s securities fraud lawyers have decades of experience seeking recovery of customer losses resulting from misconduct and fraud by investment advisory firms. If you believe you may be a victim of similar conduct, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation about your case.

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.

Vining-Sparks had filed a U-5 filing for Mr. Rodgers stating that he had voluntarily resigned from the firm in May 2022. According to the AWC, Mr. Rodgers failed to appear for related on the record testimony, and he and FINRA agreed to a sanction of a bar from registering with FINRA securities Broker-Dealers.

Mr. Rodgers’ FINRA Brokercheck report shows one customer complaint relating to an alleged failure to disclose risk from 2011, with a $105,000.00 settlement.

Greco & Greco’s lawyers have extensive experience with securities fraud cases involving outside business activities of brokers which have not been disclosed to their firms. If you have suffered losses due to your broker’s recommendation to invest in an investment that turned out to be fraudulent, and wish to discuss the matter for free with an attorney, please contact Scott Greco for a free securities fraud attorney consultation.

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.

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.

• From 2012 until 2022 Mr. Good solicited customers to transfer funds to his personal bank account, allegedly for investments in real estate and government bonds.
• In ponzi scheme fashion, the transferred monies were used to repay earlier customers who had also invested, in addition to payment of Mr. Good’s personal expenses.
• The alleged fraud included at least $4,800,000.00 paid from customers, and approximately $2,000,000.00 in losses for investors.

Mr. Good was also indefinitely barred from the securities industry by FINRA pursuant to an Acceptance, Waiver and Consent agreement. Mr. Good’s FINRA Brokercheck report also discloses two customer complaints of alleged misappropriation of funds.

The Brokercheck report does not report any settlement of the claims by Mr. Good or Morgan Stanley. Securities firms such as Morgan Stanley may be found liable for the wrongful and fraudulent actions of their brokers under a number of legal theories. First, employers can be liable for the fraudulent acts of their employees and agents under basic agency law. Second, most state securities laws including North Carolina’s hold control persons (firms and management of firms) legally responsible for the securities fraud of their brokers, and provide for returns of losses, interest, and reasonable attorneys fees.

If you were a victim of Mr. Good or another financial advisor who stole funds or conducted a ponzi scheme, and wish to discuss your potential case with an attorney, please contact the securities fraud lawyers at Greco & Greco. You can contact Scott Greco here for a free attorney consultation.

The Complaint alleges that Western and its brokers sold high risk and potentially illiquid L bonds issued by GWG Holdings, Inc., with many of the sales to customers on fixed incomes and with moderate risk tolerances. The SEC’s press release alleged that the Defendants “failed to comply with Reg BI’s “Care Obligation” both because they did not exercise reasonable diligence, care, and skill to understand the risks, rewards, and costs associated with L Bonds, and also because they recommended L Bonds to at least seven particular customers without a reasonable basis to believe the bonds were in their customers’ best interests.”

The SEC also claimed that the activities and sales violated the compliance component of Reg BI which requires firms to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Reg BI.

Western’s advisors allegedly sold $13.3 million of the L bonds in 2020 and 2021.

Greco & Greco’ securities fraud lawyers regularly represent harmed individuals who were sold unsuitable investments that were not in their best interest, and has brought multiple FINRA arbitrations against Western International in the past. If you lost money in GWG L bonds sold by Western brokers or brokers from another firm, and wish to discuss your claims, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.

According the the FINRA Letter of Acceptance Waiver and Consent found here, Mr. Rowe refused to provide documents in response to a request of FINRA investigators. The AWC, signed by Mr. Rowe, imposed a bar on Mr. Rowe’s association with any FINRA member in all capacities.

Mr. Rowe’s FINRA Brokercheck report reveals that he voluntarily resigned from Oppenheimer in May 2020 after an allegation that he took a loan from a client without disclosing it to the firm. The report also references multiple customer complaints related to alleged loans, as well as complaints related to unauthorized trading, and inappropriate margin use. Interestingly, a customer complaint regarding a loan made after his separation from Oppenheimer is still listed as “denied” by the firm.

Mr. Rowe’s Brokercheck also reveals two prior settlements of customer complaints in 2005 and 2009 related to allegations of unsuitable trades.

Loans from customers to FINRA registered financial advisors are generally prohibited by FINRA Rules, with a couple minor exceptions. Loans between customers and advisors may often be used by advisors to hide conversion, theft of monies, or other wrongful conduct. FINRA Rule 3240 sets out the limited exceptions to the general prohibition, including loans between family members, and situations involving relationships between the parties outside the customer-broker relationship. Even under those limited circumstances, the loans have to be allowed by the firm, and have to be approved by the firm.

Virginia securities regulations, and those of many other states, also prohibit loans between securities brokers and customers. See 21 VAC 5-20-280 which consider the following to be a violation of duties to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade: “1. Engage in the practice of lending or borrowing money or securities from a customer, or acting as a custodian for money, securities or an executed stock power of a customer.”

The Virginia securities fraud attorneys at Greco & Greco have represented multiple customers in FINRA arbitrations over the years involved in recommended loans to securities salespersons in violation of FINRA Rules and state regulations. If you would like to discuss your situation with an attorney at no charge, please contact Scott Greco for a free attorney consultation.