CFP Board Imposes Public Sanctions on 22 Individuals

Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) announced today public sanctions against 22 current or former CFP® professionals, effective immediately or on the date noted in each case. Public sanctions taken by CFP Board, in order of increasing severity, include Public Censures, Suspensions, Temporary Bars, Permanent Bars and Revocations of the right to use the CFP® marks.

CFP Board’s Enforcement Process

As part of their certification, CFP® professionals make a commitment to CFP Board to abide by CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards) or its predecessor, the Standards of Professional Conduct (Standards), which included the Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Rules of Conduct and Financial Planning Practice Standards. Individuals on the pathway to CFP® certification make a commitment to abide by CFP Board’s Pathway to CFP® Certification Agreement (Pathway Agreement).

CFP Board’s Procedural Rules set forth the process for investigating matters and imposing sanctions where violations have been found.

CFP Board enforces its ethical standards by investigating alleged violations and, where there is probable cause to believe there are grounds for sanction, presents a Complaint containing the alleged violations to CFP Board’s Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Commission meets at least six times a year to review any matter in which CFP Board has alleged that a CFP® professional has violated CFP Board’s Code and Standards or its predecessor Standards, or an individual pursuing initial CFP® certification has violated the Pathway Agreement. The Commission functions in accordance with the Procedural Rules and reviews all matters on a case-by-case basis, considering the details specific to an individual case. If the Commission determines there are grounds for sanction, then it may impose a sanction. Commission orders may be appealed by a Respondent or CFP Board pursuant to the Procedural Rules.

In certain circumstances, such as when a CFP® professional is in default due to failure to acknowledge receipt of a Notice of Investigation or file an Answer, CFP Board staff must deliver an Administrative Order of Suspension, Temporary Bar, Revocation or Permanent Bar. Administrative Orders are subject to appeal.

More information on CFP Board’s enforcement process can be found at CFP.net/enforcement. In addition, at CFP.net/verify, CFP Board provides the public with:

• An individual’s CFP Board disciplinary history and CFP® certification status.
• Links to other sources of information about CFP® professionals that may be more recent or that may contain information that has not led to CFP Board discipline and does not appear on CFP Board’s website. This information may include customer disputes, disciplinary actions taken by a regulator or employer, certain criminal matters and certain financial matters (such as bankruptcy proceedings and unpaid judgments or liens).
• Links to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA’s) BrokerCheck and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) Investment Adviser Public Disclosure databases for individuals who are subject to FINRA or SEC oversight.

The Public Sanctions on 22 Individuals

A short summary of each sanction can be found below.

STATE	NAME	LOCATION	SANCTION
Florida	Richard S. Ewing, CFP®	Tequesta	Public Censure
Florida	Matthew A. Lapides, CFP®	Miami	Public Censure
Massachusetts	Gregory M. Doherty, CFP®	Dedham	Public Censure
North Dakota	Chad Quamme	Fargo	Temporary Bar
Louisiana	Robert M. Alvarez	Metairie	Suspension
New York	Calvin Lipscomb	Brooklyn	Suspension
Ohio	Augustus W. Abel	Powell	Suspension
Texas	Alexander D. Cohen	Dallas	Suspension
California	Steven P. McCormick	Simi Valley	Permanent Bar
California	Richard M. Sanders	North Tustin	Permanent Bar
California	Jay A. Weil	Mission Viejo	Permanent Bar
Kansas	Marvin R. Fisher	Wichita	Permanent Bar
New York	Kathryn Jane Meredith	Webster	Permanent Bar
Texas	Annetta Marie Box	Plano	Permanent Bar
California	Harold Stephenson	Concord	Revocation
Illinois	David R. Geake	Northbrook	Revocation
Illinois	Shawn E. Parker	St. Charles	Revocation
Minnesota	Michael J. Haglin	Hopkins	Revocation
New Mexico	Mark J. Jensen	Santa Fe	Revocation
Texas	Paul E. Ferraresi	Bellaire	Revocation
Texas	Michael Giannetti	Grapevine	Revocation
Texas	Douglas McKelvey	South Lake	Revocation

PUBLIC CENSURE

Florida

Richard S. Ewing, CFP® (Tequesta, Florida): In January 2023, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Ewing received a Public Censure. The Commission issued its order after determining that Mr. Ewing violated Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Conduct, which requires a certificant to be compliant with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services to a client. Mr. Ewing and his firm entered into a Consent Order with the New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation, finding that he and his firm were engaged in investment advisory business in and from New Hampshire without lawful registration from 2006 until 2014 in violation of New Hampshire law. As a result of these violations, Mr. Ewing and his firm were required to pay a fine of $15,000, costs of $15,000, back-owed licensing fees of $800, restitution to the customer for losses and accrued interest totaling more than $17,000, and advisory fees plus interest totaling more than $29,000. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Ewing an Order of Public Censure.

Matthew A. Lapides, CFP® (Miami, Florida): In November 2021, CFP Board issued an order in which Mr. Lapides received a Public Censure. This sanction followed an appeal of a July 2021 decision by the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Code and Standards Enforcement Committee of CFP Board (Enforcement Committee) affirmed the Commission’s findings that the State of Florida Office of Financial Regulation (Regulator) determined on May 28, 2015, that Mr. Lapides had engaged in unregistered activity when he conducted investment advisory business in Florida from January 2014 to June 2015. On July 17, 2015, the Regulator executed a Final Order adopting a Stipulation and Consent Agreement pursuant to which Mr. Lapides agreed that he (a) engaged in investment advisory business in and from Florida without the benefit of lawful registration in violation of § 517.12(4), Florida Statutes, (b) shall cease and desist from any further violations of Chapter 517, Florida Statutes and Rules thereunder; (c) shall pay an administrative fine of $5,000; and (d) the Regulator shall approve Mr. Lapides’ pending application for registration as an associated person with his firm upon payment of the required fine and entry of the Final Order. The Enforcement Committee also affirmed the Commission’s finding that Mr. Lapides failed to timely disclose the Regulator’s Final Order to CFP Board within 30 calendar days of entry, or on his 2017 or 2019 CFP Board Ethics Declarations. In addition, the Enforcement Committee affirmed the Commission’s finding that Mr. Lapides violated Rule 4.3 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct, which provides that “a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services to the client,” and Rule 6.2 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct, which provides that a “certificant shall meet all CFP Board requirements, including continuing education requirements, to retain the right to use the CFP® marks.” Accordingly, CFP Board issued to Mr. Lapides a Public Censure.

MASSACHUSETTS

Gregory M. Doherty, CFP® (Dedham, Massachusetts): In December 2022, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Doherty received a Public Censure. The Commission determined that Mr. Doherty violated Rule 3.7 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not lend money to a client, and Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Conduct, which requires a certificant to be compliant with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services to a client. From March 3, 2017, through April 2, 2018, Mr. Doherty loaned a total of $38,900 to clients when he transferred funds from his personal account to his clients’ accounts. The clients were not members of Mr. Doherty’s immediate family, nor did Mr. Doherty work for an institution in the business of lending money. Furthermore, Mr. Doherty entered into a Consent Order with the State of Massachusetts, Securities Division, wherein he agreed that he failed to fulfill an independent verification requirement of the assets under his custody and loaned funds to his clients in violation of § 203(a) and § 204(a)(2)(G) of the Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 110A. Pursuant to the Massachusetts Consent Order, Mr. Doherty agreed to a $10,000 fine, to cease and desist from violations of Massachusetts Regulations, and to engage an accountant to conduct an independent audit of all accounts for which his firm had custody. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Doherty an Order of Public Censure.

TEMPORARY BAR

NORTH DAKOTA

Chad Quamme (Fargo, North Dakota): In January 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Quamme from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Quamme’s relinquishment of his certification and failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a civil judgment filed against Mr. Quamme totaling $59,202. Mr. Quamme’s conduct may have violated Standard E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the CFP® professional, the CFP® marks or the profession. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Quamme has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar. Mr. Quamme’s administrative temporary bar was effective as of February 20, 2023.

SUSPENSION

LOUISIANA

Robert M. Alvarez (Metairie, Louisiana): In November 2022, CFP Board issued an order in which Mr. Alvarez received a Suspension of One Year and One Day. This sanction followed an appeal of a May 2022 Order of Suspension from the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Appeals Commission of CFP Board affirmed the Commission’s findings that the Louisiana Department of Insurance (DPI) issued Mr. Alvarez a Notice of Fine, finding he “impersonated another licensed producer on the phone in the conduct of the business of insurance regarding a query related to a policy of insurance” in violation of Louisiana Insurance Code, and fined Respondent $500.00. The Appeals Commission also affirmed the Commission’s findings that Mr. Alvarez’s conduct violated Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services provided to the client, and Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. The Appeals Commission also affirmed the Commission’s finding that Mr. Alvarez then made an intentional misrepresentation to CFP Board regarding the event on his Ethics Disclosure, in violation of Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks. It further affirmed that, in addition to several aggravating factors and no mitigating factors, Mr. Alvarez had prior discipline by the CFP Board in 2015 based on a 2013 Cautionary Action Letter from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), indicating a pattern of misconduct. Pursuant to the decision of the Appeals Commission, Mr. Alvarez’s suspension is effective from November 28, 2022 to November 29, 2023.

Calvin Lipscomb (Brooklyn, New York): In March 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Lipscomb’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Lipscomb’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a civil judgment filed against Mr. Lipscomb for $273,694. Mr. Lipscomb’s conduct may have violated Standard E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the CFP® professional, the CFP® marks or the profession. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Lipscomb has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension. Mr. Lipscomb’s administrative suspension was effective as of April 24, 2023.

OHIO

Augustus W. Abel (Powell, Ohio): In February 2023, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Abel received a three-year suspension of his certification and right to use the CFP® marks. The Commission determined that Mr. Abel violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession, when he was convicted of Physical Control of a Vehicle while Intoxicated in Ohio in 2018, which was his second misdemeanor conviction for an alcohol-related offense. The Commission also found that Mr. Abel violated Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional shall meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks, when he failed to notify CFP Board of his September 24, 2018, misdemeanor conviction within 30 calendar days, as required by CFP Board, and when he also answered “No” on his 2019 Ethics Declaration, in violation of Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. In determining the appropriate sanction, the Commission considered, among other factors, Mr. Abel’s statements, including at the hearing, that he continues to engage in risky conduct by driving after consuming alcohol. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Abel a Suspension of three years. The suspension is effective from March 29, 2023, to March 29, 2026.

TEXAS

Alexander D. Cohen (Dallas, Texas): In February 2023, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Cohen received a four-year suspension of his certification and right to use the CFP® marks. The Commission determined that Mr. Cohen violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct and Standard E.2.d. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provide that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession, when he incurred a tax liability over multiple years starting from 2013, resulting in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) filing federal tax liens against him and an outstanding tax balance of approximately $350,000 with accrued interest and penalties. As of the date of the hearing, Mr. Cohen did not have a plan to satisfy his outstanding tax obligations, such as an installment agreement or Offer in Compromise in place with the IRS. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Cohen a Suspension of four years. The suspension is effective from March 24, 2023, to March 24, 2027.

PERMANENT BAR

CALIFORNIA

Steven P. McCormick (Simi Valley, California): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. McCormick from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. McCormick’s relinquishment of his certification and failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Mr. McCormick failed to cooperate with CFP Board’s investigation into his outstanding federal tax lien. The Complaint alleged that Mr. McCormick accrued an outstanding balance of approximately $397,983 with the Internal Revenue Service, demonstrating an inability to manage his personal finances. CFP Board’s Complaint further alleged that Mr. McCormick’s conduct violated Standard E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct and Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provide that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on his or his integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession. Mr. McCormick failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. McCormick has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. McCormick’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of January 16, 2023.

Richard M. Sanders (North Tustin, California): In March 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Sanders from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Sanders’ relinquishment of his certification and failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Sanders violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. As set forth in the Complaint, CFP Board sought to investigate a client complaint alleging unauthorized trading and dishonesty, and a second client complaint alleging unauthorized trading. Mr. Sanders failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Sanders has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Sanders’ administrative permanent bar was effective as of April 24, 2023.

Jay A. Weil (Mission Viejo, California): In February 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Weil from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Weil’s relinquishment of his certification and failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged in its Complaint that Mr. Weil’s firm prepared a retirement plan for a law firm. The Complaint further alleged that Mr. Weil’s spouse was a founder and partner of the law firm. According to CFP Board’s Complaint, in the agreement that set up the retirement plan, the law firm agreed to pay Mr. Weil and his firm 0.75% of the assets in the retirement plan each year. The Complaint also alleged that in the proposal for the retirement plan, Mr. Weil had stated that his firm would “help you administer your plan efficiently and in accordance with the law” and provide a retirement plan that “stays legal and in conformance with all government regulations.” Despite those assurances, as set forth in the Complaint, Mr. Weil’s firm caused the fiduciaries of the retirement plan to regularly engage in prohibited transactions under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The Complaint alleged that as a partner of the law firm, Mr. Weil’s spouse was a trustee and fiduciary of the retirement plan, and Mr. Weil was a party in interest as the spouse of a fiduciary. Accordingly, the Complaint alleged that the payments to Mr. Weil and his firm were a transfer of the assets of the plan to a party of interest and were prohibited transactions under ERISA. The Complaint further alleged that when interviewed under oath about the matter, Mr. Weil stated that he did not recall having any training regarding the requirements of ERISA. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Weil’s conduct violated Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional shall offer advice only in those areas in which he or she is competent to do so and shall maintain competence in all areas in which he or she is engaged to provide professional services. Mr. Weil failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Weil has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Weil’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of March 6, 2023.

KANSAS

Marvin R. Fisher (Wichita, Kansas): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Fisher from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Fisher’s relinquishment of his certification and failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Fisher’s conduct violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. As set forth in the Complaint, CFP Board sought to investigate Mr. Fisher’s outstanding federal tax liens totaling approximately $180,000. Mr. Fisher failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Fisher has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Fisher’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of January 3, 2023.

NEW YORK

Kathryn Jane Meredith (Webster, New York): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Ms. Meredith’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Meredith’s relinquishment of her certification and failure to respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a June 6, 2022, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Cease and Desist Order (Order) entered into by a firm of which Ms. Meredith was an owner until February 28, 2020, when she retired. The Order stated that the firm breached its fiduciary duty in connection with its receipt of mutual fund fees pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (12b-1 fees) and commissions in the form of sales “loads” from advisory client investments without fully and fairly disclosing the conflicts of interest arising from its receipt of that compensation. The Order further stated that, since at least January 2016, the firm invested the vast majority of clients’ assets in certain mutual funds that paid 12b-1 fees and charged sales load commissions exclusively through an introducing broker-dealer (the Introducing Broker-Dealer), with whom Ms. Meredith was a registered representative. As a result, the Order concluded, the firm’s clients paid 12b-1 fees and commissions to the Introducing Broker-Dealer, a portion of which were shared with the firm. Under Article 4.1.a of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Meredith has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Ms. Meredith’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of January 4, 2023.

TEXAS

Annetta Marie Box (Plano, Texas): In January 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Ms. Box from applying for or obtaining the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Box’s relinquishment of her certification and failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate an August 11, 2022, Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in which FINRA barred Ms. Box from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity. In the AWC, Ms. Box consented to the sanction imposed by FINRA and to the entry of its findings that she refused to provide information and documents in connection with an investigation of her outside business activities. Ms. Box’s conduct may have violated Standard A.8 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional must comply with the laws, rules and regulations governing Professional Services. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Box has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Ms. Box’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of February 20, 2023.

REVOCATION

CALIFORNIA

Harold Stephenson (Concord, California): In March 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Stephenson’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Stephenson’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate Mr. Stephenson’s termination from his firm following allegations that he circumvented his firm’s supervisory and compliance procedures in facilitating an unapproved securities transaction. Mr. Stephenson’s conduct may have violated Standard D.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which requires a CFP® professional to comply with the policies and procedures of his or her firm. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Stephenson has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Stephenson’s administrative revocation was effective as of April 24, 2023.

ILLINOIS

David R. Geake (Northbrook, Illinois): In March 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Geake’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Geake’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Geake failed to cooperate with CFP Board’s investigation by not appearing for on-the-record testimony. As set forth in the Complaint, CFP Board was investigating Mr. Geake’s resignation from a firm for engaging in an unreported private securities transaction and several customer arbitrations. The arbitrations included allegations of unsuitable alternative investments, failure to conduct due diligence on the alternative investments and breach of fiduciary duty. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Geake’s conduct violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional must cooperate fully with CFP Board’s requests, investigations, disciplinary proceedings and disciplinary decisions. Mr. Geake failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Geake has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Geake’s administrative revocation was effective as of May 1, 2023.

Shawn E. Parker (St. Charles, Illinois): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Parker’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Parker’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Ms. Parker submitted inaccurate reimbursement requests to her firm in connection with annual client events and, thus, received reimbursements for expenses not eligible for reimbursement through the firm’s program. The Complaint further alleged that Ms. Parker violated her firm’s compliance policies by failing to disclose gifts to clients as well as charitable contributions that she made. As a result of her actions as set forth in the Complaint, Ms. Parker was permitted to resign from her firm and consented to a permanent bar from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Ms. Parker’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession, and Rule 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional must comply with the policies and procedures of the CFP® professional’s firm. Ms. Parker failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Parker has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Parker’s administrative revocation was effective as of January 1, 2023.

MINNESOTA

Michael J. Haglin (Hopkins, Minnesota): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Haglin’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Haglin’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation which sought information concerning an August 2022 arrest for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). This was Mr. Haglin’s third arrest for DWI in the past five years. Mr. Haglin’s conduct may have violated Standard E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on his or his integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Haglin has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Haglin’s administrative revocation was effective as of January 16, 2023.

NEW MEXICO

Mark J. Jensen (Santa Fe, New Mexico): In March 2023, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Jensen’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Jensen’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Jensen failed to act in the best interests of 12 financial planning clients by: (1) introducing into their accounts an options-based investment fund that he did not adequately understand; (2) overconcentrating clients in this unsuitable options-based investment fund with some concentration levels reaching 41%; and (3) recommending that at least two of these clients leverage their accounts to purchase the unsuitable options-based investment fund. CFP Board’s Complaint also alleged that Mr. Jensen did not adequately understand the options-based investment fund and its risks, believing it to be a conservative investment and safe choice despite the significant risks disclosed in the fund’s prospectus and other materials. CFP Board’s Complaint further alleged that Mr. Jensen failed to obtain basic client information, such as the clients’ investment objective and risk tolerance, necessary to fulfill his obligations to his clients. By virtue of the foregoing, Mr. Jensen’s clients lost multiple millions of dollars. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Jensen’s conduct violated Rules 1.4, 3.3 and 4.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Rule 1.4 requires a CFP® professional to place the interests of the client ahead of his or her own. Rule 3.3 requires a CFP® professional to obtain the information necessary to fulfill his or her obligations. Rule 4.5 requires a CFP® professional to make and implement only recommendations that are suitable for the client. Mr. Jensen failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Jensen has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Jensen’s administrative revocation was effective as of April 3, 2023.

TEXAS

Paul E. Ferraresi (Bellaire, Texas): In December 2022, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Ferraresi’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Ferraresi’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Ferraresi: (1) lacked a reasonable basis to make multiple unsuitable recommendations that customers invest in risky alternative investments; (2) failed to exercise his fiduciary duties to his customers by recommending investing in an illiquid alternative investment without conducting adequate due diligence into the product; and (3) filed bankruptcy to avoid actual and potential obligations to customers. CFP Board’s Complaint further alleged that Mr. Ferraresi’s conduct violated Rules 1.4, 4.5 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Rule 1.4 requires a CFP® professional to place the interest of the client ahead of his or her own at all times. Rule 4.5 requires a CFP® professional to make and implement only recommendations that are suitable for the client. Rule 6.5 provides that a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks or upon the profession. Mr. Ferraresi failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Ferraresi has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Ferraresi’s administrative revocation was effective as of January 11, 2023.

Michael Giannetti (Grapevine, Texas): In September 2022, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Giannetti’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Giannetti’s failure to provide evidence to CFP Board that he had complied with the Interim Suspension Order CFP Board issued to him on April 5, 2022, and was no longer using the CFP® certification marks. CFP Board obtained evidence indicating that Mr. Giannetti used the CFP® certification marks while the Interim Suspension Order was in effect. CFP Board issued the Interim Suspension Order after discovering that Mr. Giannetti had received a permanent bar from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority for refusing to participate in its investigation into his potential participation in undisclosed outside business activities. On July 6, 2022, CFP Board contacted Mr. Giannetti after his failure to fulfill his Interim Suspension compliance requirements, but he did not respond. Under Article 4.1.c. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Giannetti has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Giannetti’s administrative revocation was effective as of October 7, 2022.

Douglas McKelvey (South Lake, Texas): In January 2023, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. McKelvey’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. McKelvey’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation and deliver proof of compliance with CFP Board’s Interim Suspension Order as required by Articles 1.1 and 2.3 of the Procedural Rules, respectively. On September 21, 2022, CFP Board issued Mr. McKelvey an Interim Suspension Order after receiving evidence that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority permanently barred him from associating with a member firm in any capacity. In CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, CFP Board sought to investigate Mr. McKelvey’s termination from his firm after allegations of unauthorized activity and misappropriation of client funds from client accounts. Mr. McKelvey’s conduct may have violated Standard A.8 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which provides that a CFP® professional must comply with the laws, rules and regulations governing Professional Services. Under Articles 4.1.a. and 4.1.c. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. McKelvey has been deemed in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. McKelvey’s administrative revocation was effective as of February 20, 2023.