This Investment Is a Slam Dunk--Not.

Ordinary investors aren't the only ones who get fleeced by rogue brokers, financial scam artists, and Ponzi schemers. It also happens--quite a bit actually--to professional athletes. Just because a pro ball player is wealthy and successful thanks to athletic prowess does not mean they're a sophisticated investor. That goes for wealthy and successful people in general. In other words, and even if arbitrators and juries don't always see it this way, wealth does not equal sophistication when it comes to investments and financial products. Time and again, we have seen NBA, NHL, and MLB players targeted by false friends or fraudsters who take advantage of a pro athlete's bank account or good will. A recent piece we came across on Financial Advisor strums the same sad chord. 

In this case, FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) put the kibosh on the activities of Success Trade Securities nd its CEO and founder, Fuad Ahmed, for fraudulent behavior in the sale of $18 million in promissory notes to 58 investors. Many of these investors were pro athletes. It's highly likely that these athletes invested in Success Trade at the behest of their brokers, who apparently didn't think to look more closely at the suspiciously high rates of interest the notes promised, nor at the legitimacy of the underlying business and its owner. What the brokers were looking at, we're pretty darn sure, was the prospect of making a quick buck off their baller clients. According to the report, the Success Trade notes "promised to pay an annual interest rate of 12.5 percent on a monthly basis over three years and some promised interest as high as 26 percent." Red flag, right there. As we've said before and we'll say again, if it sounds too good to be true... Case in point, Ahmed continued to raise funds to meet his goal of $5 million long after he'd already collected the $5 million. Plus, he gave himself "loans" and paid off new investors with previous investors' money (a Ponzi scheme in the making). Whether you're a pro athlete or an ordinary investor, don't let a broker or huckster sell you a piece of bright blue sky and or get funny with your money...

But if they do, and you become a victim of financial adviser misconduct or any other form of investment fraud, contact us for a free consultation. We may not be able to dunk a basketball, but we know how produce results when it comes to securities litigation.

Bad Apple REIT Spoils a Bunch

Sometimes a bad investment is just a bad investment. At least, that's the message that was sent by a recent ruling from a US federal judge in a class-action suit against Richmond-based Apple REIT Co, a real estate investment trust which invests primarily in hotels. The story begins in Washington back in October 2012 when FINRA sanctioned brokerage David Lerner Associates (DLA) of Syosset, NY to the tune of $14 million for restitutions to customers and fines. FINRA's sanction was punishment for what the regulatory agency determined was a whole lot of unfair practices by DLA related to offering Apple REIT Ten, as well as excessive markups on municipal bonds and CMOs. To read the full complaint, click here.

As sole distributor of Apple REITs, DLA was found to be targeting unsophisticated investors and the elderly; selling the illiquid securities without determining if they were suitable for customers; using misleading marketing materials; and touting the REIT's performance as a "fabulous cash cow" and "gold mine." FINRA slapped them up for all of that, and suspended Lerner personally from the securities business for one-year, plus a two-year suspension from being a principal in a brokerage business. But here's where the story gets more interesting than just your average misbehaving brokerage...

he same customers who won restitution from DLA got together in a class-action suit and sued Apple REIT Co. Why not, right? If DLA was messing around, maybe Apple REIT was, too. But, somewhat surprisingly, as the April 3, 2013 ruling on the matter by US District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto of the Eastern District of New York stipulates, "investors had received sufficient disclosure to understand the risks of investing" and that Apple’s investment objectives “did not constitute actionable misrepresentations or omissions.” In other words, Apple REIT did nothing wrong. They had a high-risk product that had a real chance to be an illiquid investment given the nature of the real estate market, and apparently they had disclosed all relevant information in their marketing and promotional material. In this case, the bad Apple wasn't Apple REIT: it was DLA.

The takeaway: if a REIT discloses the nature of their product in all the small print and legalese in their offering material, that does not remove the duty of the financial adviser to make sure that this investment is suitable for an individual customer. It's the financial adviser's responsibility not only to ensure suitability, but to make a full disclosure to the customer about the risks and liquidity issues involved in an investment of this (or any) type.

If you or anyone you know has been the victim of misleading marketing material or any other form of broker misconduct, please contact us for a free consultation.

An Injustice Lurks within the Justice System

How often do you read the fine print? Or, ok, let's make the question more concrete... Have you read our site disclaimer? It sits at the very bottom of the page there, down in the footer, in a font that's a little smaller than our body text font so as not to annoy people, and it definitely qualifies as a kind of fine print. It's ok if you've never read it. It's not like we're asking you to sign away your rights based on what's in the disclaimer or anything--we're not your brokerage company or financial adviser. Because that's basically what they do. We'll come to the point: it's just as unlikely for you to read The Green Firm site disclaimer as it is for you to read the fine print in the agreement you signed with your brokerage or financial adviser that gets you to waive your right to file a claim against them in court or to participate in a class-action lawsuit. Don't know what we're talking about? Well... Chances are you already signed the agreement without even realizing what you were giving away. And that's exactly what the brokerages count on.

Fortunately, there's been a push recently by some politicians along with an influential member of the SEC to onsider adopting new rules that would prevent or restrict brokerages from forcing customers to sign away their right to sue. As things stand, if your broker loses all your money through chicanery or negligence and you want to sue him or her and their supervising brokerage firm, you will have to take your case before an arbitration panel administered by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA. No trial, no jury--just you, attorneys, and an arbitration panel. Now, brokerages like to argue (as credit card companies do as well) that binding customers to arbitration reduces legal costs and help with frivolous litigation. Well, fine, that's bully for them! But from where we sit--and it seems like more and more people are starting to agree with us--this arrangement doesn't just favor the interests of the big brokerages and advisers, it's unjust and, dare we say it, borderline UnAmerican. 

Yeah, ok, we should all read the fine print. But realistically, as we demonstrated above, most people don't. This puts customers in the awful position of being fleeced not once but twice: first, when the brokerage gets them to sign away their right to sue or join a class-action suit; and then again when their advisers through negligence or misconduct lose the customer's hard-earned cash. 

Broker-Client Communication Breakdown

If you don't read past the first sentence of this entry, hear this: you are the client, and your financial adviser works for YOU, not the other way around. We're often dismayed at how readily investors surrender their authority to brokers. Part of this could be due to the fact that financial advisors have a high degree of expertise (that's why you hired them), and so we defer to their expertise. Plus, brokers tend to want to control their own domain. As professionals who are constantly being scrutinized by their bosses, FINRA, the SEC, and who knows who else, they'd often rather not be engaged in constant communication with their client as well--especially when things aren't going so well. But, brokers need to remember to whom they owe their primary fiduciary duty. In salesmen parlance, it's a version of the old nugget, "The customer is always right." In all the froth and fury of trading, brokers can often forget that ultimately they're providing a service to their clients--and that the client, the customer, is always right.

In a perfect world, financial advisers wouldn't need to be reminded of how fiduciary duties break down, nor how discretion works. In our not-so-perfect world, it's up the client and, in situations where communication really breaks down, FINRA's job, to remind them. And, well, when FINRA has to remind a broker, it's generally in the form of penalties, fines, and suspensions. A recent article suggests that FINRA is sending out more and more of these stern reminders. Since January, the regulatory agency has disciplined 17 different brokers for "improper use of discretion"--more than twice the amount in the same period of time last year.

ere's the takeaway: unless you the client give your broker full discretion to make all investment decisions on your behalf, he or she must seek your approval before making any trades in your account. Period. What may seem like common sense--your broker checks in with you before taking risks with your money--doesn't always shake down that way, unfortunately. Remember the perfect world thing... Many brokers--whether it's because they're feeling cavalier, or because they're chasing a hot investment opportunity, or because they can't reach their client quickly enough, will take the liberty of making trades in non-discretionary accounts without explicit client approval. What's worse, this seems to happen most often with elderly or less sophisticated investors who simply fail to recognize the unauthorized trading. By the time they do, the consequences are often dire. 

Here's what investors can do to help prevent improper use of discretion:

1) Check your monthly statements and the confirmations of account activity that are mailed to you. If you see trades or other activity you don't recall authorizing, call your broker immediately to discuss it with him or her. If your broker acts fishy, call the branch manager.

2) eep notes or other written records of your conversations with your broker, noting key issues and information, such as the date and time of the conversations, what recommendations were made, what particular investments were discussed, etc.

3) Stay in frequent contact with your financial adviser. It's your money, never forget it, and the more closely you stay in touch with your broker, the less likely he or she will be to take liberties with your money. If your financial adviser does not return your phone calls in a timely fashion or otherwise proves inaccessible, consider it a red flag and contact the branch manager.

If you or anyone you know has been the victim of improper use of discretion or any other form of broker misconduct, please contact us immediately for a free consultation.

FINRA Is Watching, But Always Be Vigilant

This week a number of articles suggested that, as we feared, Wall Street has learned nothing from the recent financial crisis. Well, maybe not nothing. Rather than steering clear of the securitized debt responsible for the collapse of the real estate market and much of the financial market as well, Wall Street investment firms are working on new and innovative ways of resurrecting securitized financial products (you remember that stuff, right? Layer upon a layer of bad debt with an icing of good debt on top...).

Hopefully, we've all learned in the meantime to be more vigilant and skeptical of the finance world's "miracle" products. Not only that, but the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and its CEO, Richard Ketchum, are continuing to broadcast their message of "Heightened Supervision" by investment advisors and brokerage firms when it comes to complex financial products. As Ketchum plainly warns, if broker-dealer firms want their affiliated financial advisers to offer tricky investment opportunities like options trading, variable annuities, or complex products like leveraged and non-traditional ETFs, they MUST undertake greater supervision of the advisers and of the performance of the products themselves.

For investors who have already been the victim of the misuse or abuse of one of those products, it's not just a warning: it's a chance to win money back.

As we at The Green Firm have seen firsthand in recent cases, it can often be difficult to recover money from an individual broker's misconduct. Often it's simply a matter of "you can't get blood from stone." BUT, that advisor's misconduct often extends to the supervising broker-dealer. And thanks to Ketchum's strong message, it should become increasingly easy to hold broker-dealer firms responsible for failing to deliver the kind of "Heightened Supervision" that complex financial products require, according to FINRA. Not only does this supervision apply to the proper use of specific products; it also applies to the suitability of specific products to specific investors. In other words, FINRA's concept of "suitability" dictates that there must be an affinity between the investment product and the customer. If you're a risk-averse or conservative investor, your broker should not have you invested in high-risk, complex financial products.

Finally, in the article, Ketchum mentions that, "When a broker moves to a new firm and calls a customer to say, 'You should move your account with me because it will be good for you,' the customer needs to know all of the broker's motivations for moving. In some instances, recommendations to customers can be driven by direct and indirect compensation incentives to the financial advisor and the firm itself."
We at The Green Firm would just like to remind that your own interests and the interests of your broker are not always aligned. The best protection you have against broker misconduct is free: ask lots of questions. If your broker switches employers and insists you migrate with them, be sure to ask what's in it for them.

Rogue Broker Runs Wild

A recent article on alleged con man Karl Hahn caught our eye for two key reasons. First, it's yet another cautionary tale of a friend swindling another friend out of a whole lot of money. We saw this not long ago in the case of major league pitcher, Barry Zito. In this particular case, the victim was a Silicon Valley legend named Chase Bailey, formerly a chief scientist for Cisco Systems, serial startup entrepreneur, actor and filmmaker. Bailey and Hahn became friends while Hahn, a former financial adviser, was working for Deutsche Bank. Hahn began the alleged con by selling Bailey very expensive life insurance policies, then proceeded to fleece Bailey out of millions of dollars through a series of what appear to be completely false and fraudulent coastal real estate deals. Some friend. Unfortunately, by the time Bailey caught on to Hahn, the alleged con man had already filed for bankruptcy, making it extremely unlikely Bailey and his legal team will be able to recover the $10.5M judgment from Hahn personally (in a colorful wrinkle, Hahn now finds himself working at Home Depot). However, and this is the second key reason we wanted to share this article:

"Also linked to the case are three of Hahn's former employers: Merrill Lynch, Deutsche Bank and Oppenheimer. All denied "vicarious liability" for, and negligent supervision of Hahn, but according to FINRA records, they all reached unspecified settlements before a FINRA hearing commenced."

As this quote indicates, in cases where it may prove difficult to recover from a rogue broker like Hahn, we at The Green Firm have found that through extensive investigation, we are often able to expose the broker's employers by showing that they knew or should have known about this type of gross misconduct and yet they did nothing to protect their clients.  

If you or someone you know has the been the victim of investment fraud or broker misconduct, please contact us immediately to discuss your legal rights.

Texas Investor Wins "Churning" Claim

If you haven't heard of investment "churning" before, you're not alone. Think of the propellor of a boat that's still tied to the dock. It spins around and around, spewing up water but going nowhere. Now take that image and apply it to your investment account. Churning is a technique that crooked brokers use to generate sales commissions through excessive trading in an account, resulting in diminishing the account's value.

We came across a recent case of churning--one of the most egregious we've ever seen--here. According to ruling issued by FINRA, Oppenheimer and Co. Inc. and two of its brokers astonishingly generated more than $500K in commissions on a portfolio valued at $2M over only a 2 1/2 year period. 

While sales commissions ideally account for 3-4% of the portfolio's value, in this case it was more like 20%. The claimant, a successful business owner in Texas, sought $4M in damages. The FINRA panel has awarded only $848,000 in damages, $174,000 in legal fees, plus interest and costs. 

f you think you have been the victim of churning, please contact us immediately to review your legal rights. The Green Firm not only has experience handling cases involving churning, but we are pleased to note that we ourselves often work with the renowned expert economist mentioned several times in the article, Mr. Craig McCann. Big shout-out to Craig! 

Mini-Madoffs Keep Ponzi Schemes Popping

When the Madoff scam broke in 2008, a lot of people seemed to think that dragging his astoundingly nefarious activities into the stark light of day would mark the end of onzi schemes. People wouldn't believe anymore in investment products or portfolios that never went down. They'd run away from the smooth-talker's big, empty promises to make them a whole lot of money without any risk. Ponzi schemes wouldn't fool us anymore. At least for a little while. Maybe. Or not... Apparently Ponzi practitioners are still alive and well and continuing to fleece unsuspecting investors out of their hard-earned cash. A recent disciplinary deal struck between FINRA and an allegedly crooked and obviously very foolish financial adviser named Sarris (with the help of Sarris' allegedly equally crooked and presumably also very foolish father) reveals how the felonious spirit of Madoff and Ponzi lives in our, we thought, more cautious world:

e must be more careful. Of course men and women who manipulate others in order to take their money are predators, plain and simple; and their techniques are constantly evolving. But as we at The Green Firm have seen over the years, more often than not, while the products and mechanics of their schemes change, crooked brokers, advisors, and salespeople of pretty much every stripe tend to strike the same incredible pitch:

If you ever hear anything like that statement above, "riskless investment strategy that never lost money and consistently returned in excess of 13% per year on average," alarm bells should start going off. Remember, as FINRA strongly counsels and we wholeheartedly second, "If it sounds to good to be true..." You know the rest. 

If you or someone you know has the victim of a Ponzi scheme or any other form of investment advisor misconduct, please contact us for a free consultation.

"Home of the World's Best REIT!"

We've all seen them. Ads and billboards where business claims it's the "world's best" whatever--for some reason we instantly think of pizza or burgers. Generally we take these outlandish claims with a grain or salt (or a shake of oregano). But in the world of private placement offerings, false advertising is no joke. Especially not to FINRA. As usual, the regulatory agency is out to punish private companies who sell or attempt to sell the public any type of securities under false pretenses or based on misinformation. 

A recent article on Yahoo finance reminded us to talk about what an important role advertising has to play in the securities industry, and how often advertising is used to manipulate unsophisticated investors into shady deals. For example, from the article:

Now, this is a particularly large and egregious case. But deceitful deals like this are being pitched to unsuspecting investors all the time. As we've mentioned many times before, if you're not an investment professional yourself, before you consider getting involved in a private placement or REIT like the one described above--or frankly any kind of investment offering--consult a trusted financial adviser and get their opinion first. Otherwise you could become another alarming statistic. After all, in 2012 alone, FINRA reported $10.4 million in fines from cases involving alleged advertising violations. And that's not even accounting for the tens of millions of dollars in restitutions FINRA ordered.

If, unfortunately, it's too late, and you've already been the victim of misleading advertising for securities, please contact us immediately to discuss your options. 

Background check your broker

You work hard for your money. You're diligent about saving for retirement. But when it comes to choosing an investment advisor, are you really being careful enough with your life savings? Do you really know who's managing your money? How do you know they're as reliable as they say they are. Well, the first step you should take before you even think about handing your hard-earned money over to an investment advisor is to use FINRA's BrokerCheck® to make sure you're not dealing with a known crook or fraudster.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) is the nation's largest independent regulator of securities firms, and it's BrokerCheck® should be your first stop for pre-qualifying any prospective financial advisor. Through BrokerCheck®, you can now:

• Search for information about brokers and brokerage firms
• Search for information about investment adviser firms and representatives
• Obtain online background reports, if available
• Link to additional resources such as educational tools for investors

Better still, it's really easy to use. All you need is the broker's name and his or her CRD number. If a broker has run afoul of FINRA in the past, you'll find out about it here--and naturally we at The Green Firm urge you to strongly reconsider working with the offending broker, even if you've heard what a rainmaker he or she is!

FINRA is so committed to getting BrokerCheck® out there that it recently filed a proposal to force member firms as well as affiliated brokers to include a link and description of BrokerCheck® on their websites, social media pages, and any other presence on the internet. Pending SEC approval, you should start seeing direct links to BrokerCheck® popping up everywhere on financial websites. We encourage you to use them!

At The Green Firm, our position is and has always been that we want as much public awareness as possible about FINRA's BrokerCheck® because financial advisors rarely if ever advise their clients that they can search their employment background and complaint history--and the bad ones especially don't suggest it.  Most of the clients we've worked with who have been victims of investment fraud or other forms of stock broker mismanagement had no idea that they could background check their broker.

f you or anyone you know has been a victim of investment advisor misconduct, please contact us immediately for a free consultation.

FINRA's Monthly Blacklist

We don't know about you, but seeing the unjust finally get their due always gives us a boost. hat's in part why we look forward to the release of FINRA's monthly "Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions" report. This is just what it sounds like, a listing of all the sanctions, fines, suspensions, and other disciplinary actions that have handed down by FINRA against the iniquitous brokers, investment advisors, and brokerage firms who have dis-served or manipulated their customers in so many different ways. It's a long report, but what stood out to us is the recurring appearance of firms who have mishandled private placements in flagrant disregard for FINRA's warnings over the past few years that they would be cracking down on private placements (see 2010 and 2011 "Annual Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letters" as well as Regulatory Notice NTM 10-22 in April 2010.) FINRA was not kidding. Janco Partners, Lincoln Financial, Roth Capital Partners, and the Tidal Group--to name a few--have all suffered penalties as a result of failures to fulfill their obligations related to private placements. If you're not sure or need a refresher on what a private placement is, here's Wikipedia on the subject:

Also worth noting in the report is the fact that KMS Financial Services was punished for failing to do its due diligence before letting its broker-dealers sell shares in a dubious hedge fund. Bad on them. FINRA warned you! According to Regulatory Notice 10-22, if a firm knows about a private placement offering, they are required to conduct due diligence to make sure the private placement is suitable for its customers before investing. 

Finally, FINRA also provides listings for individual brokers who have been suspended. It's a long list (see page 17). If you've ever had it in the back of your mind that your broker-dealer ripped you off, why not see if he or she made the list... And then contact us. 

Granny Gets Taken

 A particularly distasteful case recently came to our attention that describes how a former Wells Fargo Broker defrauded an elderly widow out of $650,000. Despicable. And, unfortunately, all too frequent an occurrence...

The elderly are common targets for financial adviser misconduct, fraud, and all kinds of other injurious, unlawful behavior. One tip for elderly people (and for the younger generations who should be looking out for them) to prevent being taken advantage of would be to take the time each month to review your account statements. If there is anything fishy or even just difficult to understand in the statements, schedule a meeting with your financial adviser in order for him and her to explain everything in the statements.  If you have reason to suspect he or she is not being honest with you, begin to document these meetings and any other meetings you have with your adviser.  It is a helpful way to remember what you were told; and, if you ever end up in arbitration for any reason, you will have an incredibly effective tool for an attorney arguing your case. 

If you or anyone you know has been a victim of broker misconduct or securities fraud, please contact us for a free consultation.

Know Your Enemy

As a recent article in US News & World Report reminded us, investors trying to win back their money after they've been the victimized by investment advisor misconduct are, well, kind of in a rigged game. That's because, whether they know it or not, when investors open an account with a brokerage firm, they most likely are required to sign a mandatory arbitration clause that causes them to waive their constitutional right to a jury trial, and binds them to FINRA's arbitration process instead. As the article's author notes, "So far, efforts to abolish this requirement—which is inherently unfair to investors—have been unavailing. The securities industry is a powerful lobby. The last thing they want is a forum where claims against its members will be judged fairly and impartially."

These mandatory arbitration clauses present a large hurdle for individuals who have been victims of broker misconduct, since arbitrators oftentimes rule in favor of the financial industry and deny the claims of victims entirely.  In fact, according to the statistics of FINRA's own website, "Results of Customer Claimant Arbitration Award Cases," over the past 5 years in cases decided by arbitrators, less than 50% saw monetary compensation awarded to Claimants (see table inset.)

nother important point is that investors who need to consult an attorney for a dispute with their financial adviser must be sure to ask any prospective attorney if he or she has experience representing customers in the FINRA arbitration process. The FINRA arbitration process contains many nuances that are unique to itself and not present in a typical commercial litigation lawsuit filed with the court.

Finally, nd in light of the award statistics cited above, it would be doubly wise to retain an attorney who has actually won a FINRA arbitration on behalf of an individual in the past. An attorney with a successful FINRA track record can not only more accurately evaluate the likelihood of winning an award, but he or she will possess the experience to know what it takes to win an award at a final hearing within this complex, opaque, and  suspect system that FINRA operates and the securities industry must be grateful for.

If you or anyone you know has been a victim of securities fraud or broker misconduct, please contact us for a free consultation.

Beware of Non-traditional ETFs

SInce The Green Firm is currently pursuing a case involving a particularly egregious abuse of non-traditional ETFs, we thought it might be useful to revisit these exotic investment products and explain why they tend to be misunderstood and misused by stock brokers more accustomed to a traditional "buy-and-hold" strategy. Traditional investing principles urge brokers to "buy low and sell high." Often this means holding onto a specific financial product or stock for a long period of time while waiting for it to arrive at its "true," projected, or peak value, at which point the product is sold before it has a chance to decline. Generally, this type of traditional "value" investing is stable, low risk and low return; it also happens to be suitable for customers with a low-risk tolerance. Non-traditional ETFs, on the other, are complex, high-risk financial products that are designed to perform radically differently. According to FINRA's website, leveraged and inverse ETFs "commonly represent an interest in a portfolio of securities that track an underlying benchmark or index [not the stock market as a whole]. A leveraged ETF generally seeks to deliver multiples of the daily performance of the index or benchmark that it tracks. An inverse ETF generally seeks to deliver the opposite of the daily performance of the index or benchmark that it tracks. Inverse ETFs often are marketed as a way for investors to profit from, or at least hedge their exposure to, downward-moving markets. Some ETFs are both inverse and leveraged, meaning that they seek a return that is a multiple of the inverse performance of the underlying index." One should note that inverse ETFs are particularly tricky, since they are hedging instruments, and thus are intended to perform well in volatile markets. While a financial advisor may describe these non-traditional ETFs as a product that would be suitable in a down market, given the fact that these products "reset" daily (meaning they are designed to meet their objectives on a daily basis), even in a declining market these non-traditional ETFs should not be held for longer than one trading session. Here are some helpful examples from FINRA's Regulatory Notice 09-31:

​FINRA Resolution 09-31

Many an unfortunate customer has lost money due to an uninformed or negligent broker keeping them invested in leveraged and inverse ETFs inappropriately. We have found in our cases that oftentimes the individual financial advisor does not understand the nature or use of non-traditional ETFs, and so are forced to look at the firm they work for in seeking an answer to the question of why they are investing customers in products they themselves have no grasp of. In many cases, branch managers and even the brokerage firms are not nearly familiar enough with these complex products. Clearly, ETFs can be counterintuitive and risky financial products that are not suitable for every investor, nor understood or properly used by every financial advisor or firm. 

If you or someone you know has lost money as a result of improper use of non-traditional ETFs, please contact us.

SF Giants Pitcher, Barry Zito, sues for $3M

A recent lawsuit by San Francisco Giants hurler Barry Zito alleges that his friend used their relationship to mislead Zito into making a $3M investment on a fitness software startup that never materialized. We've seen misrepresentation like this before, and we're pretty sure we'll see it again. Unfortunately, pro athletes with large salaries and limited investment knowledge are highly susceptible to manipulation by stock brokers and friends alike. Precisely because they have a lot of money, they tend to be over-trusting of friends who they believe have their best interests in mind. Not always the case. And it's important to keep in mind that perpetrators of securities fraud are not always stock brokers or financial advisors--they can be anyone who enters upon a securities contract.

f you or someone you know think you've been the victim of securities fraud or misrepresentation, please The Green Firm immediately for a free consultation.

Wall Street Broker Costs NFL Players $40M

As a recent high-profile case covered widely in the media involving several NFL players reveals, broker misconduct can victimize anyone, from an isolated elderly citizen to a group of professional athletes.

FINRA has banned Wall Street broker Jeffrey Rubin from the securities industry after he allegedly lost 30 football players nearly $40 million through unsuitable investments that were shored up by kick-backs from a failed casino.

The Green Firm has successfully pursued broker misconduct cases for professional athletes in the past. If you or someone you know has been the victim of broker misconduct in the form of unsuitable investments, please contact us immediately for a free consultation.