Attorney for Victims of Stockbroker Fraud or Investment Loss Due to Conflicts of Interest

Sometimes in connection with the recommendation of the purchase of a security, instead of advancing the customer’s or investor’s financial interest, the stockbroker or investment professional made the recommendation to advance their own financial interests.

How Stockbrokers Abuse the System to Benefit Themselves

The most abused investment products, or at least among the top ten investment products at issue in FINRA securities arbitrations, are the products that offer the highest compensation to the stockbroker or investment professional selling these securities, such as variable annuities, non-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”) or other alternative investments.

In addition, these same conflicts of interest, between the stockbroker’s financial interests and the financial interests of the investor may arise from the recommendation and sale of proprietary products including mutual funds that are related to the brokerage firm or securities broker-dealer. Firms are not allowed to explicitly offer greater compensation to their stockbrokers for the sale of these captive funds, but have devised clever methods of circumventing these restrictions by offering sometimes a higher gross commission payout based upon the overall composition of the stockbroker’s proprietary business but not tied to any specific security.

Much has been written about the “Best Interest Rule” or Regulation BI, where stockbrokers or investment professionals are required to make recommendations in the best interest of the customer.  While certainly this Rule (or in fact regulation) is a step in the right direction, the Rule only requires the “disclosure” of costs and fees, versus alternative costs and fees, and explicitly states that the new rule, and its violation, does not create a private cause of action for injured investors which would allow the investor to bring a lawsuit in court or a claim in arbitration before FINRA.

Conflicts of interest, and tainted investment recommendations which are the product of those conflicts of interest, are a breach of fiduciary duty.  Among those duties, is the duty of care, the duty of candor, and the duty to refrain from self-dealing.   The recommendation that an investor purchase a security which yields the highest financial compensation for the stockbroker at the investors expense, rather than what is otherwise right or suitable for the investor is self-dealing.

Contact Our Attorneys for Victims of Stockbroker Conflicts of Interest

Investors who suspect that they have been the victim of conflicted or tainted investment recommendations and have suffered losses, ought to consult with a lawyer to determine their legal rights.  The time to file these claims is limited, and is generally limited, in most states, to two years from the date of discovery of the facts giving rise to these claims upon the exercise of reasonable diligence.

The Guiliano Law Group offers representation in these matters on a contingent fee basis, meaning that there is no cost to the investor unless we make a recovery.  Although we are selective about the cases in which we offer representation, we also offer a free, no-obligation, confidential evaluation of any conflict of interest claim.   For additional information, or to schedule an interview about your case, contact us at (877) SEC-ATTY.   


  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

AboutNicholas Guiliano, Esq.

Nicholas J. Guiliano has more than 25 years of securities related experience, and has represented more than 1,000 public customers in claims against brokerage firms for fraud in connection with the sale of securities principally in arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) Dispute Resolution, Inc. (formerly known as The National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”) Dispute Resolution, and the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) Department of Arbitration.