Page 1 of 1 , 4 Items in Total
16145 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Professional Discipline; Fraud Related to Professional Activity; Customer Complaints; Suitability; Settlement; Diligence; Record-Keeping; Fitness; Disclosure to Clients; Client's Best Interest; Lawsuits Involving Financial Matters; Negligence; Competency
Standard(s) Violated: Article 606(a); 201; 401(a); Article 3(a); 405; 402; 606(b); 607; 102
Matter Type(s): Client Dissatisfaction
Decision Date: 03/26/2010
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) treated a client’s payments as nontaxable gifts rather than taxable income; 2) did not disclose the income on his 2000 and 2001 state and federal tax returns; 3) did not disclose to a client the potential for a conflict of interest in serving as the appointed trustee of a trust and as an investment adviser for the trust; 4) double and triple charged clients for services; and 5) failed to disclose commissions.

19075 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Revocation by DEC
Keyword(s): Fiduciary Duty; Professionalism; Commission/Compensation; Disclosure to Clients; Commingling; Suitability; Diligence; Client's Best Interest; Fitness
Standard(s) Violated: Article 402; 610; 607; 703; 103(e); 702(a); Article 3(a); 201; 405; 701; 103(d); 202
Matter Type(s): Client Dissatisfaction; Professionalism; Civil Court
Decision Date: 08/13/2009
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct (“Standards”) when he performed financial planning services for a client’s (“Client”) father (“Client’s Father”) without providing to the Client’s Father a written financial planning agreement and written disclosures and when he received the Client’s Father’s funds through a bank account controlled by Respondent.

29005 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Employer Policy Violation; Fiduciary Duty; Suitability; Disclosure to Clients
Standard(s) Violated: Article 4.6; 102; 1.4; 201; 5.1; 406; 606(b); 4.1; 4.4; 401(a); 606(a); 6.5; 2.2(a); 4.3
Matter Type(s): Other Professional Discipline
Decision Date: 11/20/2014
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when she sold “C” shares to her clients not because they were suitable, but as a method of ensuring that she was paid for her advisory services, and failed to: 1) enter into written advisory agreements with her “C” share advisory clients; 2) provide written disclosures required by Part 2 of Form ADV to her “C” share advisory clients; and 3) provide a complete description of the share class options and fees of mutual funds to her “C” share advisory clients and failed to: 1) ensure that salespersons were making suitable “C” share investment recommendations; 2) enforce the RIA Manual requirement of a written advisory agreement for clients using “C” shares as an advisory fee; and 3) enforce the requirement of delivery of the Disclosure Document. Respondent also failed to reasonably supervise her salespersons by failing to ensure that salespersons were making suitable “C” share investment recommendations. Respondent also failed to report her suspension by State from acting in any principal or supervisory capacity for twelve months to CFP Board within 30 calendar days, in violation of Article 13.2 of the Disciplinary Rules and Procedures (“Disciplinary Rules”).

29328 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Private Censure
Keyword(s): Professional Discipline; Failure to Register; Supervision; Disclosure to Clients
Standard(s) Violated: Article 4.6; 6.5; 4.3
Matter Type(s): Other Professional Discipline
Decision Date: 04/10/2015
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) allowed an employee to act as an investment adviser representative without registration as an investment adviser representative; 2) failed to ensure that Firm’s annual updating amendments to the Form ADV were filed timely; 3) failed to ensure that Firm provided accurate account statements; 4) failed to amend his Form U4 timely to reflect the change of his residential address; 5) failed to ensure that Firm’s owners were properly disclosed on Form ADV; 6) failed to supervise Firm and his designee, JE, by virtue of his failure to ensure that the firm’s requisite annual reviews were conducted annually (i.e., 2011 and 2012), and when they were conducted (i.e., 2009 and 2010), they were reasonably designed to detect the numerous failures cited by SSC; and 7) entered into the Order with the SSC regarding violations of state securities laws and regulations.

Page 1 of 1 , 4 Items in Total