According to a May 5, 2011 Investment News article, Wells Fargo took as many as 153 days to deliver prospectuses to more than 900,000 clients who purchased mutual funds in 2009. (Securities law requires that prospectuses be delivered to purchasers within three days of the buy.) For dragging their feet, the company has been fined $1M by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
Wells Fargo also allegedly failed to take action to remedy the situation after learning that up to 9 percent of its customers had not received prospectuses within the requisite three days.
FINRA enforcement chief Brad Bennett stressed the importance of prospectuses to customers, as they contain important data regarding a fund’s costs, plans, performance history and risks. By failing to deliver prospectuses in a timely manner, said Bennett, Well Fargo deprived its customers of key information.
According to the article, Wells Fargo further broke FINRA rules by failing to report client complaints. Neither did the company disclose all arbitration claims that involved its representatives within the required 30 days.
Were you one of Wells Fargo’s more than 900,000 unlucky customers? If you suffered financial loss as a result of the company’s misconduct, contact an investment recovery attorney at Carlson Law.
Tags: financial loss, FINRA, investment recovery attorney, mutual fund, mutual funds, prospectus, Securities Fraud Attorney San Diego, securities lawsuit, Wells Fargo
Posted in Fiduciary Duty Breach, Negligent Misrepresentation, Securities Arbitration, Securities Law, Stock Loss | Comments (2)
Mutual Funds 101
Mutual funds are sold by companies that pool money (capital) from many investors. This capital is then invested in bonds, stocks and/or other securities. Investors in the fund all have shares, and these shares represent a part of the fund’s holdings.
If you’re interested in making an investment, a mutual fund may or may not be the right choice for you. Like all investments, they come with many different levels of risk. They aren’t insured or guaranteed by financial institutions or government agencies, even those sold by banks. However, because mutual funds are often a mix of various bonds and/or stocks, the risk is some mutual funds is “spread out” or diversified. That said, some mutual funds are not diversified, and it is important to understand that a mutual fund investment can be very high risk, or very low risk, depending upon the holdings and the goals of the fund. Each fund must be looked at individually to determine if it is appropriate for the investor, in the same manner as any individual stock or other investment.
Mutual funds are managed by professional fund managers. These managers invest the money investors contribute into individual stocks, bonds and other securities. And because mutual funds buy and sell securities in large amounts at one time, they usually incur fewer fees, thus operating in a cost-efficient manner. However, it is very important to carefully examine prior to purchase all of the fees and costs associated with the fund you are purchasing as they can vary greatly and take a significant bite out of your return.
If you feel your financial advisor placed you in inappropriate mutual fund investments and/or failed to disclose the fees and costs associated with investment or that the underlying holdings of the fund were beyond your tolerance for risk, you may have a case. Call Carlson Law at 858-544-9300 for a free consultation.
Tags: bonds, Broker Fraud, capital, disclosure, diversification, Fiduciary Duty Breach, financial, financial loss, FINRA, Fraud Attorney, Investment, investment attorney, investment loss, Investor, investors, losses, mutual fund, mutual funds, Negligent Misrepresentation, San Diego, securities, Securities Fraud Attorney San Diego, securities lawsuit, Stock Loss, stocks, unsuitability, Unsuitable
Posted in Broker Fraud, Fiduciary Duty Breach, Investment Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation, Securities Arbitration, Securities Fraud, Securities Law, Securities Litigation, Stock Fraud, Stock Loss | Comments (0)
Making financial investments with money from a loan on your home is generally a poor, high risk activity. And it’s a particularly poor idea when the investment is a private placement that’s speculative and unable to be liquidated easily or traded publically. Brokerage houses that encourage clients to take out extra mortgages or home equity loans in order to buy risky investments in limited partnership and private placements are often held liable for their customers’ financial loss.
In 2009, the Ameritas Investment Corporation was fined $100,000 by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) for not supervising one of its brokers whose deceptive financial recommendations to customers included home refinancing to purchase securities. The broker was fined $60,000 by FINRA, and her license was suspended for five years.
If your broker encouraged you to take out real estate loans in order to invest in any private securities, limited partnerships or other investments, you should seek the advice of a securities attorney. Contact Carlson Law for a free consultation.
Tags: Broker Fraud, Fiduciary Duty Breach, financial loss, Investment Fraud, investment loss, investment recovery, limited partnerships, Negligent Misrepresentation, private securities, San Diego, Securities Arbitration, Securities Attorney, Securities Fraud Attorney San Diego, securities lawsuit
Posted in Broker Fraud, Fiduciary Duty Breach, Investment Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation, Securities Arbitration, Securities Fraud, Securities Law, Securities Litigation, Stock Fraud | Comments (1)
Image via Wikipedia
In early May 2011 Robin Carnahan, Missouri’s Secretary of State, announced that A.G. Edwards & Sons LLC will pay $755,000 in order to settle charges that they improperly handled annuity sales. The investment firm, now a part of Wells Fargo Advisors, purportedly sold variable annuities to elderly customers sans proper documentation.
The State of Missouri Investigates AG Edwards
An investigation by the Securities Division of the State of Missouri into the conduct of AG Edwards began after a client reported “irregularities” following the liquidation of his variable annuity.
Upon investigation, it was discovered that the firm sold variable annuities to elderly investors without maintaining proper records of the transactions. Because proper documentation was lacking, the annuity sales were not in compliance with the company’s own policies and Missouri state law.
Investors Are Compensated
Approximately 31 investors were impacted by this lack of due diligence on the part of the brokerage firm. In compensation, AG Edwards will pay them $381,993. They will also pay for the costs of the investigation and contribute $375,000 to the Missouri State Investor Education and Protection Fund.
In an April 2011 press release, Carnahan said she appreciated AG Edwards’ willingness to cooperate with state officials. Moreover, she urged those who fear for the safety of their investments to seek help.
California Law Protects Elderly Investors
Did you know that California law requires brokers to provide compelling reasons for the exchange or sale of variable annuities belonging to clients 65 or over? If you feel that your variable annuities have been mishandled by a broker, contact Carlson Law.
Tags: A.G. Edwards & Sons LLC, annuity sales, Broker Fraud, Carlson Law, compensation, elderly investors, financial loss, Investment Fraud, investment loss, Securities Fraud Attorney San Diego, securities lawsuit, variable annuities, variable annuity, Wells Fargo Advisors
Posted in Broker Fraud, Fiduciary Duty Breach, Investment Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation, Securities Fraud, Securities Law, Securities Litigation | Comments (2)
After filing its first quarter financials, the parent company of Securities America, Ameriprise, announced plans to sell the embattled firm. Securities America, which is in the process of negotiating settlement of a class action suit filed against it for investment fraud, allegedly sold clients hundreds of millions of fraudulent Medical Capital and Provident Royalties securities.
An April 25, 2011, article in Investment News (“Ameriprise Shopping Securities America”) describes Securities America as financially strong. A follow-up article on the 26th, however, puts that somewhat into question as it announced a whopping $115 million first quarter loss. Nevertheless, Ameriprise asserts that Securities America can operate without disruption thanks to its parent company’s sound financial backing.
Can Ameriprise find a buyer for Securities America? According to Ameriprise management, it’s in the process of “identifying” one now. The sale, it claims, would let the company “focus on growth opportunities” while Ameriprise focuses on “Ameriprise branded-advisor business.” The company also claims that the sale would not affect settlement of the current securities lawsuit.
Tags: Ameriprise, Class action, Investment Fraud, Medical Capital, Provident Royalties, Securities America, securities lawsuit
Posted in Broker Fraud, Fiduciary Duty Breach, Investment Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation, Securities Arbitration, Securities Fraud, Securities Law, Securities Litigation, Stock Loss | Comments (0)