Wells Fargo Accused By Customer Of Suitability

George Frederick Dance Jr of Daphne Alabama, a stockbroker registered with Wells Fargo Advisors, is the subject of a customer initiated investment related written complaint on July 25, 2017, where the customer seeks more than $5,000.00 in damages based upon accusations that an unsuitable investment allocation had been effectuated for the customer’s managed account between June 22, 2012 and July 25, 2017.

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Public Disclosure confirms that Dance has been referenced in eight additional customer initiated investment related disputes that pertain to allegations of Dance’s misconduct while employed with Wells Fargo, Wachovia Securities Inc. and AmSouth Investment Services, Inc. Particularly, on December 6, 2002, a customer filed an investment related written complaint regarding Dance’s activities, in which the customer requested more than $5,000.00 in damages founded on allegations that over-the-counter equities trades were placed in the customer’s account without the customer’s consent.

Dance: On December 24, 2002, a customer initiated investment related written complaint involving Dance’s conduct was settled for $20,000.00 in damages supported by accusations that the financial advisor placed technology stock trades in the customer’s account that were not appropriate for the customer in consideration of the customer’s objectives for investing and age. Moreover, the customer alleged that trades had been placed by the financial advisor without speaking with the customer.

Dance: Thereafter, on February 3, 2003, a customer initiated investment related written complaint pertaining to Dance’s activities was resolved for $5,000.00 in damages founded on accusations that Dance misled the customer in reference to the customer’s two variable annuity purchases, wherein the customer claimed to have been told that five-hundred dollar withdrawals could be effected from the customer’s investment account each month without detrimentally affecting the value of each annuity’s death benefit. The customer additionally alleged that annuity contracts were not provided, and if provided, would have alerted the customer to cancel the policies during a ten day free look period.

Dance: On February 13, 2003, another customer filed an investment related written complaint regarding Dance’s activities, where the customer sought $150,000.00 in damages supported by allegations that over-the-counter equities transactions were placed in the customer’s individual retirement account without the customer’s consent, the customer’s investment portfolio had been churned, and that investment transactions were inappropriate in consideration of the customer’s age.

Subsequently, on April 14, 2003, a customer initiated investment related written complaint that concerned Dance’s conduct was settled for $20,000.00 in damages based upon accusations that the customer’s accounts had been mishandled by the financial advisor, wherein equity transactions failed to conform to the customer’s conservative investment objectives.

Further, on October 9, 2008, a customer filed an investment related written complaint regarding Dance’s activities, in which the customer requested $5,000.00 in damages based upon allegations that Dance made misleading statements to the customer concerning the terms, conditions and penalties relating to the customer’s variable annuity investment. Moreover, on February 1, 2017, a customer initiated investment related written complaint regarding Dance’s activities was resolved for $5,000.00 in damages supported by accusations of suitability relating to mutual fund transactions placed in the customer’s account between March 24, 2014 and October 11, 2016.

There is just no dancing around it.  The information contained herein has been obtained from reliable sources however may not be accurate and is not guaranteed by us. Readers are encouraged to undertake their own independent investigation and evaluation of the relevant facts. All claims and allegations are subject to adjudication, decisions may be subject to appeal, and no inference is intended, nor should any inference be made from any information contained herein from any source.

This posting and the information on our website is for general information purposes only. This content should be not considered legal advice, and any responses, comments, e-mails, other communications do not form any attorney client relationship. Attorney Advertisement. See Important Disclaimer

Guiliano Law Group

Our practice is limited to the representation of investors. We accept representation on a contingent fee basis, meaning there is no cost to you unless we make a recovery for you. There is never any charge for a consultation or an evaluation of your claim. For more information, contact us at (877) SEC-ATTY.

For more information concerning common claims against stockbrokers and investment professionals, please visit us at stockbrokerfraud.com

To learn more about FINRA Securities Arbitration, and the legal process, please visit us at securitiesarbitrations.com