Page 1 of 1 , 7 Items in Total
22305 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Diligence; Employer Policy Violation; Conflict of Interest; Borrowing from Client
Standard(s) Violated: Article Article 3(a); 406; 201; 606(b); 409; 607
Matter Type(s): Professionalism; Civil Court
Decision Date: 04/06/2012
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional ("Respondent") violated CFP Board's Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) accepted a $100,000 loan from a client, which violated his firm's policy against borrowing from clients; 2) failed to repay the client's loan according to the original terms of the promssory note; 3) failed to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and the risks associated with the promissory note; 4) failed to determine whether the promissory note he executed with his client was appropriate for his client; 5) allowed the client to purchase a piece of real estate for Respondent's benefit; and 6) failed to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and the risks associated with the client's purchase of a piece of real estate.

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.

28165 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Professional Discipline; Client's Best Interest; Misrepresentation; Securities Laws Violation; Suitability
Standard(s) Violated: Article Article 3(a); 6.5; 4.3; 1.4; 4.4; Article 3(d); 5.1
Matter Type(s): FINRA Discipline
Decision Date: 07/31/2013
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) used discretion to buy and sell approximately 120 Inverse Floater CMOs for his clients’ accounts without obtaining prior written authorization from the clients and prior written acceptance of their accounts as discretionary by his firm, in violation of the firm’s policy, National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”, now known as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. or “FINRA”) Rule 2510 and FINRA Rule 2010; and 2) was suspended by FINRA for violating FINRA rules.

28285 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Conflict of Interest; Professional Discipline; Outside Business Activity; Commission/Compensation; Employer Policy Violation; Client's Best Interest
Standard(s) Violated: Article 2.2(b); 6.5; 1.4; 5.1; 4.4; 4.3
Matter Type(s): FINRA Discipline
Decision Date: 09/10/2013
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: 1) engaged in an outside business activity without providing notice and receiving prior written approval from his Firm; and 2) falsely certified to his broker-dealer that he was not engaged in outside business activity.

29246 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Fiduciary Duty; Misrepresentation; Commission/Compensation; Conflict of Interest; Professional Discipline; Suitability; Securities Laws Violation
Standard(s) Violated: Article 4.5; 2.1; 2.2(a); 2.2(b); 4.3; 1.4; Article 3(d)
Matter Type(s): Other Professional Discipline
Decision Date: 10/01/2018
Summary:

Whether a CFP® professional violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct by making material misstatements and omissions to their clients while recommending that the clients invest in what was found to be a Ponzi-like investment scheme.


30850 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Failure-to-Report; Client's Best Interest; Fiduciary Duty; Misrepresentation; Suitability
Standard(s) Violated: Article Article 3(e); Article 3(d); Article 3(a); 4.5; 4.4; 4.3; 2.1; 1.4
Matter Type(s): FINRA Arbitration; Failure to Disclose to CFP Board; FINRA Discipline
Decision Date: 06/01/2018
Summary:

Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he (1) made an unsuitable investment recommendation to a client; (2) misrepresented the values of annuities being recommended to that client; (3) placed his interest above his client’s interest by making an unsuitable recommendation that resulted in more than $25,000 in commission fees for the Respondent; and (4) failed to report a subsequent suspension by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) to CFP Board within 30 days.


30210 – Anonymous Case History
Decision: Suspension
Keyword(s): Professionalism; Fiduciary Duty; Client's Best Interest; Professional Discipline; Securities Laws Violation; Misrepresentation
Standard(s) Violated: Article Article 3(d); Article 3(a); 4.4; 4.3; 2.1; 1.4
Matter Type(s): FINRA Discipline; FINRA Regulatory Action; Regulatory Action; Professionalism; Professional Organization Disciplinary Action; Other Professional Discipline
Decision Date: 02/01/2018
Summary: Whether a CFP® professional (“Respondent”) violated CFP Board’s Standards of Professional Conduct when he: (1) invested client resources into two hedge funds managed by the Respondent, when the sole investment of the funds was an Energy company with only one illiquid asset; (2) misrepresented the assets held by the hedge funds to investors; and (3) oversaw improper valuations of the hedge funds’ assets that were in violation of rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). 

Page 1 of 1 , 7 Items in Total