Stockbroker DUIs Present Regulatory Issue

Patrick Alan Deramus submitted a letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (“AWC”), for the purpose of settling a rule violation alleged by FINRA.

Deramus first became registered in 1987 and in 2005 worked as a registered person at FSC Securities Corporation (“FSC”) until his May 11 voluntary resignation.

During FSC employment, Deramus was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI). He was charged with a DUI felony count on May 28, 2009, and pled guilty to the charges on December 1, 2009. Deramus was then sentenced to a 30 day prison term and with 48 months of probation on January 27, 2010.

Deramus notified FSC on February 19, 2010, eight months after he was charged. On March 12, 2010, FSC reported Deramus’s felony charge and conviction. He was subject to statutory disqualification based on the felony conviction and on May 10, 2010, was permitted to resign.

Deramus’ conduct was contrary to several FINRA rules.

The Deramus issue touches upon DUI and DWI charges pleas and convictions. First, a felony charge does not lead to being statutorily disqualified- this sanction occurs in response to a felony conviction.  Nonetheless, any felony charge does require reporting, and many brokerage firms have internal disclosure rules that differ from industry laws. It is important to familiarize yourself with the employee handbook regarding disclosure.

Second, while a felony charge may not lead to becoming statutorily disqualified, a purposeful or willful failure to disclose a felony charge does incite statutory disqualification. This type, willful disqualification, is permanent, while a felony conviction disqualification only lasts ten years.

Another issue presents itself when defendants are surprised by the elevated level of a DUI, which was previously considered a misdemeanor but is now considered a felony. Those with prior DUI/DWI records are classified based on the frequency of such events. Depending on the state, prior offenders denote those who had pleaded guilty or were found guilty of alcohol related traffic offenses in a certain number of years. A persistent offender is one who has pleaded or been found guilty of two or more within 10 years. Again, this time frame varies from state to state.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators. We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

FINRA Sanctions BrokersXpress Representative for Unauthorized Loans

FINRA has sanctioned Gregory M. Viechnicki, a registered representative at BrokersXpress, LLC, for borrowing money from a client without seeking proper approval.

In April 2010, Viechnicki, who had no previous history of FINRA violations, borrowed $10,000 from a client. During the following months, between May 2010 and October 2010, Viechnicki repaid the loan in full, with interest, using an installment payment plan.

However, BrokerXpress’s regulations forbade representatives from borrowing money from customers, unless they received written approval from the firm. In light of alleged violations, FINRA fined Viechnicki $2,500 and suspended him from associating with any FINRA member for 10 days.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators. We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

FINRA Sanctions Broker for Willfully Failing to Amend Form U4

FINRA has sanctioned broker Stuart Funke for “willfully failing” to amend his Form U4 after being sued for failing to repay a loan and subsequently filing for bankruptcy.

In September 2005, Funke, who had no previous history of FINRA violations, accepted a loan on his and his brother’s behalf for $500,000 in exchange for a promissory note, which had a 6 month maturity period and a 14% interest rate. The people from whom Funke borrowed the money then proceeded to sued him in March 2006 for failing to repay the loan within the agreed upon period of time. The parties were able to settle in January 2007, with Funke agreeing to pay $220,000, with an additional $120,000 promissory note. Funke later filed for bankruptcy in February 2010.

FINRA took the position that Funke “willfully failed” to amend his Form U4 with his civil litigation suit, the settlement of this suit and his bankruptcy filing. Due to this alleged failure, FINRA suspended Funke from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity for 15 months. However, in light of Funke’s bankruptcy filing, FINRA allowed him a bankruptcy discharge, which prevented him from being fined.

Nonetheless, the case highlights a dangerous trap for representatives. While the penalty seems severe, the fact that there was a “willful violation” also means that Funke will be “statutorily disqualified” from FINRA. For most representatives, this amounts to an end to their career in the industry.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators. We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Former Wedbush Representative Wins Incentive Compensation

Former Wedbush Securities Inc. representative Randy LaCombe was awarded $93,819.72 in compensatory damages after a FINRA Arbitrator found that Wedbush failed to pay LaCombe commissions from July 1, 2010 until March 31, 2011.

LaCombe claimed that he resigned from his position at Wedbush after he was not paid properly according to his employment contract, which stated that he was to receive a 25% incentive compensation on all trading profits and sales to be paid quarterly. Therefore, LaCombe alleged breach of contract, failure to pay commissions, failure to pay compensation owed, and failure to honor an employment contract.

Although Webush denied all claims and put forward a number of defenses, the FINRA Arbitrator presiding over the case found the firm to be liable and instructed it to pay LaCombe an award.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators.  We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Consent Order Issued Forcing Former Merrill Lynch Advisers to Return Customer Information and Agree Not to Solicit Their Former Clients to Join Morgan Stanley

On April 27, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, entered a consent order requiring five individuals to return their customer information they took with them and agree not to solicit their former clients to join them at Morgan Stanley.  Now, the matter is in arbitration at FINRA.

Allegedly, an office manager at Merrill’s Birmingham Southeast office caught Christopher Baker and Henry Hagood printing out quarterly review reports for approximately 35 clients just two days before the team members put in their resignations on April 16th.  Other members of the team, after they resigned, allegedly downloaded and printed out customer statements and other information at different times.  The advisers, however, are allowed to keep the basic information on clients allowed under the protocol and can transfer their Merrill clients to their accounts at Morgan Stanley if the clients contact them.

Eccleston Law Offices counsel, represent and defend financial advisers nationwide in regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration and litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators.  We frequently defend forgivable loan collection actions, prosecute Form U-5 defamation actions, counsel advisers as to how to transition successfully from firm to firm and negotiate the best possible agreements with their new firm, and provide succession planning, buy-sell agreements and other exit strategies and strategic consulting, practice transitions, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Exiting the Business and Succession Planning for Financial Advisors

The average age of a financial investor is 50. This means that many investors are preparing, or should be preparing, for changes relating to exiting the business by way of a sound succession plan. These changes can include merging or selling the business, transferring the clients to another investor or finding a successor. Deciding on the ideal plan of action to guarantee a smooth succession and maximize business equity takes careful consideration with critical input and advice from knowledgeable sources.

Eccleston Law represents financial advisers nationwide in transition and succession planning, regulatory, compliance, disciplinary and employment matters in arbitration, litigation, and before regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA and state securities regulators.  If you are an advisor who is seeking a transition, please contact one of our attorneys at 312-332-0000 to discuss your move.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

FINRA Finds Both Claimant and Respondent/Counter-Clamaint Wells Fargo Advisors Liable on Breach of Promissory Note and Breach of Contract Theories

In March 2011, Jason Schlesinger filed a Statement of Claim with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) alleging breach of contract and seeking $1 million in compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. He also sought a declaration that Wells Fargo, LLC may not enforce the promissory note against him. In the Matter of the FINRA Arbitration Between: Jason Martin Schlesinger, Claimant v. Peter Yan Hong; Wallace Lawrence Key; Wells Fargo Adivsors, LLC, Respondents v. Jason Martin Schlesinger, Counter-Respondent.

In particular, Schlesinger (Claimant) alleged that he was fraudulently induced to join Wachovia Securities by a couple of promises. Those promises were: “a position in which he would be the sole broker in a start-up hub office specializing in high net worth investors; and that he would have access to a pool of names of so called orphan accounts left from a previous merger of Wachovia Securities and Gold West World Savings.” See Statement of Claim.

Claimant understood this to be a promise that he would be entitled to receive all the leads of the bankers in the new office since he would be the only broker in the office. Respondents denied these allegations and asserted affirmative defenses.

In Wells Fargo Adivsor’s (Respondent/Counter-Claimant) Counterclaim, it asserted that Claimant breached a promissory note (Note) executed by Claimant. It was alleged that when Claimant joined Wachovia the Note was executed for $925,306 on April 14, 2008. Furthermore, on July 16, 2010 the Note was amended and went down to $792,776. Respondent/Counter-Claimant requested the principal balance due on the Note ($734,052.27) plus 3.25% annual interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The FINRA Arbitration Panel (Panel) did not find fraud on behalf of the recruiters Respondents Peter Yan Hong and Wallace Lawrence Key. The Panel did find, however, there was considerable confusion on the part of Respondents as to why Claimant was paid only $87,000 for his first year at Wachovia Securities. There was also confusion on how it was calculated.

Ultimately, the Panel found Claimant liable and he was ordered to pay $734,052.27 to Respondent/Counter-Claimant Wells Fargo Advisors. In addition, the Panel found Respondent/Counter-Claimant Wells Fargo Advisors liable to Claimant and ordered it to pay him $100,000. Thus, the net final award that Claimant owed was $634,052.27.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Succession Plans Become a Necessity with an Aging Base of Brokers

Many large institutions have been bustling around while attempting to implement a plan to retain business. This is because of older brokers who continue to age and who have even older clients. On April 18th, a six-person panel at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (Sifma) addressed this issue of succession planning.

Chief administrative officer private wealth management at Robert W. Baird, Scott Falk, said there are two approaches that work well for their organization to talk transferring business to a younger advisor:

First, there are Baird qualified teams which is a creative group with various generations of advisors. Within this team there are certain rules and incentives to carry this on. Second, there is the codified succession planning. Baird has put together a binder of information and in turn formalized a program to make it easier for advisors to prepare in advance and accomplish succession plans.

Specifically, business growth begins to slow down, usually through attrition (either for health reasons or age), for advisors aged around 50. The problem typically comes to fruition when it comes time to sell their book and advisors do not have much left. It is said the most serious concern is when advisors reach the average age of 59 and do not have a plan in place to recruit younger representatives. Advisors fall victim to this problem when they fail to plan to transfer client relationships and the problem is right there in front of them. Not to mention, the number of advisors to take over the book is not very deep.

Another solution for this problem was created by RBC Wealth Management – US. That firm created a plan that creates a team with an “anchor,” which facilitates conversation between the advisors. An “official” team, according to the firm, has to have a formal strategy with roles and responsibilities as well as a succession plan for death and/or disability.

There are other firms that have used different spins on the aforementioned plans to prevent this issue from occurring. Either way it is nice to see that firms are recognizing the issue of the aging base of brokers and have been active to implement plans to remedy the problem.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments