LPL Financial

Sierra Income Investors are Losing Money

Published on: November 17, 2020 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Risky, Illiquid Business Development Company Was Not Suitable for Many Investors

If you are someone who invested in the Sierra Income Corporation, you may have lost money. This business development company (BDC) is a non-traded investment.

Earlier this year, Sierra Income suffered losses after its announced merger with Medley Capital Corp. and Medley Management Inc. was terminated because of the economic uncertainty caused by COVID-19. Not long after that, the company announced that it was suspending monthly distributions.

SEC Says Fired LPL Financial Broker Stole $300K From 73-Year Old Retiree

Published on: October 6, 2020 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Former LPL Financial Investment Advisor Was Also Was Let Go By Integrated Wealth Concepts

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed civil charges accusing former LPL Financial (LPLA) registered representative, Matthew O. Clason, of defrauding an older investor of over $300K.

In August, Clason, who worked out of Glastonbury, Connecticut, was let go by LPL Financial. He also was fired by Integrated Wealth Concepts, where he was an investment advisor. In September, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) barred Clason.

Arkansas Retiree Who Worked With Ex-LPL Financial Broker Rhett Bedwell Sues for $500K in Damages

Published on: September 7, 2020 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Senior Investor’s Loses Retirement Funds Because of Unsuitable Investment

An Arkansas retiree has filed a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration claim against LPL Financial for losses he suffered because of the unsuitable recommendation of Rhett Douglas Bedwell, one of the broker-dealer’s former registered representatives. Bedwell, who is no longer a stockbroker or investment advisor, is accused of defrauding a number of customers.

Now, this retiree is seeking up to $500K in investment loss damages after Bedwell invested a significant portion of his retirement funds in what appears to have been a Ponzi scam involving Small World Capital and the now defunct, Graysail Capital.

Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas Investigating Claims From LPL Financial Customers Who Invested in Nontraded REITS and Publicly Traded Property Interval Funds

Published on: April 20, 2020 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

LPL Blocks Sales of Nontraded Real Estate Investment Trusts and Publicly Traded Property Interval Funds

This week, LPL Financial (LPLA) announced that it had suspended its sales of several nontraded REITs, as well as a number of publicly traded property interval funds. This is because the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was placing these investments at a higher risk of losses.

In an email to InvestmentNews, LPL EVP of Products and Platforms, Rob Pettman, wouldn’t offer the names of the funds but did note that the broker-dealer hoped to offer them to investors again once the markets had calmed.

Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas Investigates Customer Claims Involving Former LPL Financial Broker Mark Lamkin

Published on: April 8, 2020 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Former LPL Financial Broker Borrowed $1.3M From Customer Without Notifying Firm

Mark Lamkin, an ex-LPL Financial representative, has been suspended by the FINRA for three months. Lamkin, who is now a Calton & Associates broker, is accused of borrowing $1.3M in total from an LPL Financial Services customer between 2011 and 2017 without getting written approval from or notifying the broker-dealer. This is not the first time he is accused of broker misconduct.

Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas (SSEK Law Firm) is investigating claims involving Mark Lamkin, who has been a registered representative for 28 years. Contact our stockbroker fraud attorneys today.

Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas Investigates Jeffery Vasiloff, Former LPL Financial Advisor

Published on: October 9, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Cleveland, Ohio

Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas (“SSEK”), a law firm specializing in representing wronged investors, is looking at allegations by FINRA into former Linsco Private Ledger (LPL) financial advisor, Jeffery Vasiloff (“Vasiloff”). Vasiloff worked at LPL in 2018 and was not employed very long. Vasiloff was fired, according to FINRA, due to allegations of utilizing discretion without obtaining the proper written authority. As a result, he was also suspended from acting as a financial advisor by FINRA. He previously worked at Invest Financial Corporation and appears to be based out of Vermilion, Ohio. After serving his suspension, Vasiloff became employed by JW Cole Financial.

Vasiloff never admitted nor denied FINRA’s finding. However, he consented to the sanctions imposed and accepted the findings that he acted improperly by refusing to obtain prior consent, in writing, from the client before acting on that client’s behalf. LPL simply reported to FINRA that Vasiloff was discharged for “use of discretion without prior written authorization.”

Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas investigates James T. Booth and LPL/INVEST

Published on: September 23, 2019 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas (“SSEK”), a law firm specializing in representing wronged investors, is looking into allegations made by FINRA in a recent AWC filing against Booth. In February 2018 LPL acquired INVEST. Booth had been working at INVEST since 2005 and has been a broker since 1988. In the AWC it is alleged that Booth received client assets with the promise of investing said assets on behalf of the clients. Booth instead used client assets for his own personal use and never actually invested the assets.

According to Booth’s official record or CRD, he has 25 disclosures or claims against him. This is an unusually high number, and generally indicates poor supervision. Almost all of the complaints are on the violative conduct listed above. According to the FINRA CRD report, most of his former clients complain of a “Ponzi scheme using multiple shell companies.”

LPL fired Booth, and according to LPL this was done after Booth admitted to misappropriation of multiple client’s assets for his own use. It should be noted that FINRA has also barred Booth from the industry and can no longer act as a stockbroker or advisor under FINRA.

LPL Financial Agrees to Pay $26M Over Unregistered Securities to State Securities Regulators

Published on: May 4, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

In an agreement reached with the North American State Securities Administrators Association, LPL Financial (LPLA) will pay $26M in fines to a number of US states and jurisdictions over unregistered securities sales going back more than a decade. NASAA reports that the settlement comes after a task force was set up last summer to probe LPL’s sales of unregistered, non-exempt securities to clients. Now, LPL will pay $499K to each state securities regulator. It also must buy back certain securities that it sold to investors going as far back as October 2006.

Details of the LPL Settlement for the Sale of Unregistered Securities

Per the settlement, LPL will offer to repurchase securities in the brokerage firm’s accounts that were found to have been unregistered, fixed-income or non-exempt equity securities. Every buyback offer will come with 3% simple interest annually. Requirements were also put in place for investors with “affected securities” that were moved or sold from an LPL account.

Goldman Sachs Gives LPL Financial Holdings Clients Access to Securities Lending

Published on: March 20, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

LPL Financial Holdings (LPLA) brokers and investment advisers will now be able to offer their clients securities lending services through Goldman Sachs (GS). Under the new arrangement, LPL clients can borrow anywhere from $75,000 to $25 million against the securities held in their accounts.

In a press release, Goldman Sachs spoke about how through its Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select, LPL clients would be able to borrow these funds for “life events,” including travel or education, without having to sell their investments. However, the money borrowed cannot be used to purchase more investments. Goldman noted that its “high-tech platform” would be able to reduce wait time for a non-purpose securities- based loan from weeks to days, with no fees charged.

Over 15,000 LPL financial advisors will now be able to offer clients access to Goldman’s securities lending capabilities. The independent investment advisory firm joins 40 other such firms and broker-dealers on Goldman’s GS Select platform.

Securities Lending Comes with Significant Risks

The ability to borrow against securities is often touted as a benefit to investors. However, securities lending may not be the best choice in the long run for many investors. While such loans allow clients to borrow against what is in their accounts, certain risks come with this advantage, including forced liquidation of accounts during bad market moves.

Texas Securities Cases: Ex-LPL Financial Adviser is Suspended for Charging Unreasonable Fees and Commissions, State Regulator Enters Cease and Desist Order Against R2B Coin, and Former Pharr Bank Worker Pleads Guilty to $1M Theft Involving Elderly Customers

Published on: January 30, 2018 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Beaumont, TX Investment Adviser is Suspended for 90 Days
In a Disciplinary Order, the Texas State Securities Board suspended former LPL Financial LLC (LPLA) investment adviser Jason N. Anderson for 90 days. The state contends that while registered with that firm, Anderson touted an active-trading program to clients that charged them unreasonable fees, which included commissions to Anderson, as well as trading costs.

For example, one client paid costs that were approximately 30% of “the value of the average equity securities” in the client’s account. The Texas regulator said that the trading program would have had to make “extraordinary returns” for investors to “offset” such fees or even, in some cases, allow them to merely “break-even.”

The order called the commissions and trading costs “inequitable practices” that violated the Texas Securities Act. The state accused Anderson of not having reasonable grounds for believing that the trading program would be appropriate for these clients.