Page 1 of 1 , 2 Items in Total
20996 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Settlement; Commission/Compensation
Standard(s) Violated: Article 703; 606(b); 202; 607; 702(b); 701; 102; 201
Matter Type(s): Civil Court
Decision Date: 03/27/2012
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) represented that an annuity maximization concept was appropriate and reasonably designed to meet Client’s needs and goals; 2) failed to disclose to Client that he received a commission due to his sale of a universal life insurance policy to her; 3) misrepresented Client’s assets in order to obtain the universal life insurance policy; 4) recommending a transaction that was inappropriate for Client but allowed Respondent to gain financially; 5) failed to disclose the tax consequences of the sale of mutual funds; 6) failed to fully investigate Client’s heir’s tax liability by considering the state and federal inheritance tax exemptions and the cost basis of each individual annuity; and 7) failed to appropriately determine Client’s cash flow needs in relation to her potential long-term care needs.

25698 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Commission/Compensation; Suitability; Borrowing from Client; Misrepresentation; Conflict of Interest
Standard(s) Violated: Article 704; 102; 606(b); 409; 607; 501; 201
Matter Type(s): Civil Court
Decision Date: 07/10/2013
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) described three private placement funds to a client as being safe and secure when they were actually highly speculative, nonpublic investments; 2) recommended and implemented a life insurance exchange for a client that resulted in more expense and less benefit for the client and a large commission for Respondent; 3) recommended and implemented an annuity exchange for a client that created a surrender penalty of approximately $21,000 for the client and a large commission for Respondent; 4) recommended three private placements to a client in which Respondent was personally invested; 5) accepted an interest-free loan from a client without executing a promissory note; and 6) forwarded a client’s contact information to the representatives of three private placements without the client’s consent.

Page 1 of 1 , 2 Items in Total