During his tenure with B. Riley and its predecessor National Securities Corporation, Kavinsky prepared consolidated account statements for his customers. Many of his customers were seniors, and these consolidated statements provided them with an overview of their financial holdings.

B. Riley discharged Kavinsky on May 16, 2024, for failing to follow the firm’s procedures for customer statements. FINRA began its investigation based on the Uniform Termination Notice for Securities Industry Registration (Form U5) it received from B. Riley on June 13, 2024.

FINRA found that from at least March of 2020 through April of 2024, Kavinsky produced over 190 bogus account statements for at least eight customers. In them, Kavinsky overstated the customer’s account balances. This led his customers to believe they had more money than the accounts held. Kavinsky also falsely claimed bogus investments in a hedge fund for at least six of these customers, when no such investment ever occurred. These false statements violate FINRA Rule 2010, requiring him to provide truthful statements to his clients.

FINRA contacted Kavinsky in July of 2024, requesting information on all his customers who received falsified account statements. In August, Kavinsky only named a married couple who had previously complained to the firm, knowing there were more. In October of 2024, Kavinsky gave on-the-record testimony to FINRA. He repeatedly and falsely stated that he never disclosed anything about hedge funds to his customers.  This violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010 when he knowingly gave false and misleading information to FINRA during his on-the-record testimony.

Following its investigation and the issuance of an Acceptance, Waiver & Consent Letter (AWC), FINRA sanctioned Kavinsky by permanently barring him from any association with any member, effective 12/20/2024.

Customer Disputes

Kavinsky is also the subject of five customer disputes with similar allegations. The first, filed on 9/12/2025, alleges fraudulent account statements, churned the client’s account, and mismanaged funds, and requests damages of $200,000.

Two additional disputes, both filed on 8/28/2025, include identical allegations. These disputes request damages of $1,400,000 and $2,000,000, respectively.

The fourth dispute, filed on 5/6/2025, includes allegations of “unauthorized trading, excessive trading,” and requests damages of $258,677.

A fifth customer dispute was filed on 6/22/2024, requesting damages of $760,000, and included allegations that Kavinsky:

• Refused to provide account statements when asked, because they believe the provided statements listed incorrect balances
• Funds from their accounts were removed and are missing
• Repeatedly provided “false and misleading information pertaining to account balances.”

This dispute was settled for $150,000.

Did You Invest With Howard Kavinsky? 

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases are handled on a contingent fee basis, meaning that you won’t owe us until we recover your money for you. Contact us today at (800) 975-4345 and let us know how we can help.

The post FINRA Bars Broker Howard Kavinsky After Falsifying Client Accounts appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

More than 5,000 investors are waiting to see if they recover any of their investment, which ranges from $1,000 to $1 million through Reg A and Reg D offerings for this non-traded REIT. The company also has roughly 1,500 creditors. A meeting of creditors will be held on April 8, 2026. RAD also has over 300 asset properties, primarily in Philadelphia.

The company filed its Chapter 11 petition on Sunday in a Florida federal court with the intent to reduce a further reduction in its real estate portfolio. It claims assets and liabilities between $50 million and $100 million. “While the debtors pre-petition management strenuously disagrees with this characterization, the accusation received substantial press coverage and crippled the debtors’ ability to operate their businesses,” RAD said in its declaration.

RAD Claims Publicity Adds To Its Problems

The problems facing RAD Diversified REIT were exacerbated by considerable publicity. The first was from the US Securities and Exchange Commission declared its offering statement as “abandoned.” This inhibited the company’s ability to raise new capital.

In a news release in July of 2025, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said RAD “appears to be a Ponzi scheme, and with several individuals claiming they’ve been exploited, we are investigating to ensure Floridians are not being deceived by greedy fraudsters.”

RAD’s founders Mendenhall and Vaughn were also served with an eviction notice by RAD’s landlord in the Tampa office in May of 2025.

A civil lawsuit filed in August against RAD by talk-show host Buck Sexton has also brought additional scrutiny to the company as well as Mendenhall and Vaughn. Sexton attended a RAD conference as a paid speaker, contributed over $100,000 to the company, and allowed his name to be used in marketing for the REIT through his national radio show. In his lawsuit, Sexton states that he was misled by RAD, defrauded, and the company failed in providing “direct access to undervalued real estate investments.”  Although RAD moved to dismiss, the case is ongoing.

Additionally, Forbes published an in-depth article on RAD in December of 2025 that included first-person accounts of former employees and several investors, including one who later joined the board of directors and began looking into the company’s financial dealings. When he began asking questions, he was locked out of the accounts and removed from the board.

Potential Third Party Securities Fraud Claims

Mendenhall and Vaughn also faced scrutiny when they appeared on a show called Going Public that is streamed exclusively on X (formerly Twitter) that allows viewers to click to invest in startups featured on the show in real time.

The pair were only on the show as guest advisors/mentors during the third season, not as issuers. Ultimately, the finale was pulled at the last minute after an investigation by Barron’s that exposed RAD Diversified REIT’s investigations by both state and local regulators into the company’s practices. The show finally aired on June 24, 2025, with Mendenhall briefly appearing to announce that he was stepping down as CEO of his company OmniCo, with his brother-in-law taking over.

The producers are now reconsidering their vetting process for guests. However, there are currently no plans for season four. The show’s credibility suffered considerable damage from Mendenhall and Vaughn’s appearance, and for the “click to invest” model that could potentially expose investors to high-risk ventures or startups that were not properly vetted prior to the broadcast.

The case is In re: RAD Diversified REIT Inc., case number 8:26-bk-01636, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida.

Did You Invest With Brandon “Dutch” Mendenhall, Amy Vaughn, or RAD Diversified REIT? 

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases are handled on a contingent fee basis, meaning that you won’t owe us until we recover your money for you. Contact us today at (800) 975-4345 and let us know how we can help.

The post Silver Law Group Is Investigating RAD Diversified REIT, Which Filed For Bankruptcy After Ponzi Scheme Allegations appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

Goliath Ventures Ponzi Scheme

Initially called Gen-Z Venture Firm, Delgado’s company was later named Goliath Ventures. The company intended to entice investors to give the firm substantial amounts of money for an alleged “investment” in cryptocurrency “liquidity pools.” Their website calls the company “a joint venture private fund that invested in blockchain and cryptocurrency projects.” Goliath was also said to leverage “liquidity pools to facilitate passive income generation, enhance market efficiency, and provide qualified investors with access to innovative financial opportunities.”

Using marketing materials, luxury events and seminars, charitable sponsorships and referrals, and paid “distributions,” Delgado convinced investors that Goliath was a legitimate and safe investment. These attempts at legitimacy allowed Delgado and Goliath to collect $328 million from investors.

Silver Law Group Florida Cryptocurrency Class Action Atorneys

The company had a complex scheme that moved investor funds through a cycle. From January 2023 through January 2026, investors were told by Delgado and Goliath directors through presentations and marketing materials that their funds would move from a traditional bank account at JPMorgan Chase in the name of Goliath, to Coinbase, then to an “encrypted ledger,” and ultimately into liquidity pools where supposed returns would be generated. From this point, the funds would then return through two encrypted ledgers to process back through Uniswap and other multiple encrypted ledgers.

According to the complaint, while Delgado and the company represented to investors about the “liquidity pools,” most of the investor funds were used for Delgado’s personal expenses, which included:

• July 2025: $3.2 million to buy a property in Winter Park, Florida

• December 2024: $1.15 million to buy a property in Kissimmee, Florida

• September 2025: $8.5 million to buy a property in Windermere, Florida

• August 2024: $1.65 million to buy a property in Sanford, Florida

To conceal these and other personal expenses, the company offered an online investor portal allowing individual investors access to their accounts, investments, and alleged returns. According to the investigator, Delgado controlled all the accounts and decided on how investment funds would be used.

Unraveling The Ponzi Scheme and Class Action Litigation

Some investors were allowed to withdraw their funds and were even paid more than they invested. This was to demonstrate the “guaranteed returns” that Goliath could provide. However, the “returns” were simply funds from other investors.

According to the complaint, in late 2025, investors began requesting withdrawals of their funds and purported dividends from Goliath, only to be met with various explanations and delays by the company. Continued requests by many investors led to the termination of their portal access.

Two of the investor cases were described in the complaint. Both investors were interviewed by one of several IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agents in relation to this complaint.

• Investor 1 was introduced to Goliath by an acquaintance who was also an investor. This acquaintance put $1M into Goliath and was “receiving regular returns.” This testimony convinced Investor 1 that it was a low-risk investment. After opening a Coinbase account and investing, the investor later requested a withdrawal of his funds. The company began stalling and offering different excuses for the delays. This investor requested to exit from the joint venture in early January of 2026 and was told he would receive everything. After receiving none, he contacted Bank of America to inquire about wire reversals. He also filed a police report with the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office on January 22, in which he stated that Goliath had ceased communication and blocked his access to the customer portal. To date, Investor 1 has received none of his investment funds and ultimately lost $720,000.
• Investor 2 invested $1 million with Goliath in August of 2024 after speaking with a company representative. The rate of return in his contract was 5%. In November of 2024, he invested another $15 million at the suggestion of a Goliath representative. In this contract, he would receive a 7% monthly return for six months and then a 7½% monthly return for the next six months. During a company-sponsored Christmas party, Delgado announced that Goliath had secured insurance and a fidelity investment bond that would cover the principal investments made by investors. Investor 2 requested information on the bond, but Delgado declined, citing possible disclosure of personal information. The investor requested a return of his principal investment. This request prompted a communication from Delgado stating his displeasure about the request but agreeing to return the funds. This investor received two disbursements, $7.1 million; it sent an additional $10.6 million in March 2025. This included both the investor’s funds and “returns” from the investments.

None of the returns came from any investment activities. All were funded from other investor funds.

Did You Invest With Goliath Ventures?  

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide to help recover investment losses from investment professional misconduct. Silver Law Group is headquartered in south Florida and has extensive experience in cryptocurrency litigation. The firm is lead by Scott Silver, the chair of AAJ’s Securities and Financial Fraud group, a PIABA board member and a frequent speaker on securities law. In 20225, Silver Law Group successfully obtained recoveries in cases against banks, auditors and law firms for allegedly aiding and abetting ponzi schemes. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases are handled on a contingent fee basis, meaning that you won’t owe us until we recover your money for you. Contact us today at (800) 975-4345 and let us know how we can help.

The post Silver Law Group investigates Goliath Ventures Alleged Ponzi Scheme Chris Delgado, Goliath’s Principal Arrested And Charged For Alleged $328M Fraud  appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

Brokers and brokerage firms are obligated to satisfy all FINRA arbitration judgements, without any unreasonable or unwarranted delay. FINRA Rule 9554 allows FINRA to ensure that brokers and brokerage firms comply with the terms of securities arbitration awards.

What Is FINRA Rule 9554?

Under FINRA’s securities industry regulations, arbitration awards must be paid within 30 days of the date that the award was granted. If a broker or brokerage firm fails to comply with this requirement, then industry regulators can use FINRA Rule 9554 to take immediate enforcement action against them.

FINRA Rule 9554 allows for expedited suspension or cancellation of membership of any party that fails to comply with a FINRA arbitration award. Specifically, regulators are empowered to send the violating party a 21-day written notice that their securities industry membership will be revoked if they do not rectify the problem.

What Defenses Do Brokers Have Against A FINRA Rule 9554 Action?

Brokerage firms and stockbroker primarily have four defenses to avoid expedited suspension under FINRA Rule 9554:

• They can prove that the arbitration award has actually already been paid in full;
• They can prove that they have reached a voluntary settlement on payment terms with the complaining customer;
• They can prove that they have taken further legal action, filing a claim to vacate or modify the award and that their motion to do so is still pending in the court; or
• They can prove that they have filed for bankruptcy or that this debt has already been discharged in bankruptcy.
• However, a financial advisor or brokerage firm cannot argue that they currently lack the “bona fide ability to pay”.

Rule 9554 is an important investor tool that helps maintain confidence in the securities arbitration process that claims will be satisfied. Unfortunately, many brokerage firms lack adequate insurance or are otherwise poorly capitalized and FINRA arbitration frequently exposes firms and individual financial advisors who fail to satisfy their financial obligations.

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms. Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred broker’s from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

Our lawyers have extensive experience collecting FINRA arbitration awards, prevailing on Motions to Vacate FINRA arbitration awards and using various collection efforts to enforce FINRA awards after they are received.

The post FINRA Suspends Stockbrokers For Failing To Comply With FINRA Arbitration Award Or Settlement Agreement February, 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

For example, FINRA Rule 3240 governs borrowing and lending arrangements between registered investment advisors (RIAs) and customers of their member firm. For the most part, this type of borrowing and lending is disfavored. Indeed, it is strictly prohibited unless certain conditions are met. FINRA routinely bars members who improperly take loans or otherwise takes money from customers.

However, in most cases, investors hire investment fraud attorneys to pursue their losses against the advisor and/or the brokerage firm through FINRA arbitration to recover those losses. In many cases, brokerage firms may be held liable for failing to supervise the financial advisor or other negligence. Silver Law Group has represented investors in FINRA arbitration to recover money from brokers who improperly borrow money from customers, invest customers in personal investments or projects and for breach of fiduciary duty when stockbrokers improperly serve as trustees or beneficiaries of a will or trust.

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms. Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred brokers from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our securities arbitration attorneys have represented investors in claims for theft, churning, improper outside business activities or selling away and other disputes against brokers and brokerage firms. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call us at 800-975-4345 to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

The post FINRA Suspends Registered Individuals For Violations Of FINRA Rules Failure to provide Information February 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

FINRA makes this information available, in part, to inform investors about potential red flags or problems with certain stockbrokers. If you invested with anyone in this report and have questions about your legal rights, our attorneys will talk with you at no cost to explain your legal rights and about how we can help recover your investment losses through securities arbitration or litigation.

FINRA Rule 8210 allows FINRA’s enforcement attorneys the authority to investigate matters under its regulatory purview. FINRA Rule 8210 requires a stockbroker or other registered person of the request to provide documents or information “with respect to any matter in [an] investigation, complaint, examination or proceeding.”

The subject matter of a FINRA investigation or inquiry can include almost anything relating to the brokerage industry or the financial advisor’s activities. FINRA regulatory rules allow for broad authority to investigate violations of FINRA’s rules and regulations including, Rule 2010 (a FINRA member “shall observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade”). Under Rule 2010 FINRA can seek any documents or other information that FINRA believes is relevant to its inquiry.  In 2013, FINRA announced in a regulatory notice that the scope of Rule 8210 had been clarified, stating that “all aspects of the relationship between a broker-dealer and its associated persons are potentially the subject of a Rule 8210 request.”

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms.  Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred brokers from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

The post FINRA Bars Stockbrokers For Failing To Provide FINRA With Information February 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

Brokers and brokerage firms are obligated to satisfy all FINRA arbitration judgements, without any unreasonable or unwarranted delay. FINRA Rule 9554 allows FINRA to ensure that brokers and brokerage firms comply with the terms of securities arbitration awards.

What Is FINRA Rule 9554?

Under FINRA’s securities industry regulations, arbitration awards must be paid within 30 days of the date that the award was granted. If a broker or brokerage firm fails to comply with this requirement, then industry regulators can use FINRA Rule 9554 to take immediate enforcement action against them.

FINRA Rule 9554 allows for expedited suspension or cancellation of membership of any party that fails to comply with a FINRA arbitration award. Specifically, regulators are empowered to send the violating party a 21-day written notice that their securities industry membership will be revoked if they do not rectify the problem.

What Defenses Do Brokers Have Against A FINRA Rule 9554 Action?

Brokerage firms and stockbroker primarily have four defenses to avoid expedited suspension under FINRA Rule 9554:

• They can prove that the arbitration award has actually already been paid in full;
• They can prove that they have reached a voluntary settlement on payment terms with the complaining customer;
• They can prove that they have taken further legal action, filing a claim to vacate or modify the award and that their motion to do so is still pending in the court; or
• They can prove that they have filed for bankruptcy or that this debt has already been discharged in bankruptcy.
• However, a financial advisor or brokerage firm cannot argue that they currently lack the “bona fide ability to pay”.

Rule 9554 is an important investor tool that helps maintain confidence in the securities arbitration process that claims will be satisfied. Unfortunately, many brokerage firms lack adequate insurance or are otherwise poorly capitalized and FINRA arbitration frequently exposes firms and individual financial advisors who fail to satisfy their financial obligations.

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms. Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred broker’s from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

Our lawyers have extensive experience collecting FINRA arbitration awards, prevailing on Motions to Vacate FINRA arbitration awards and using various collection efforts to enforce FINRA awards after they are received.

The post FINRA Suspends Stockbrokers For Failing To Comply With FINRA Arbitration Award Or Settlement Agreement January, 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

For example, FINRA Rule 3240 governs borrowing and lending arrangements between registered investment advisors (RIAs) and customers of their member firm. For the most part, this type of borrowing and lending is disfavored. Indeed, it is strictly prohibited unless certain conditions are met. FINRA routinely bars members who improperly take loans or otherwise takes money from customers.

However, in most cases, investors hire investment fraud attorneys to pursue their losses against the advisor and/or the brokerage firm through FINRA arbitration to recover those losses. In many cases, brokerage firms may be held liable for failing to supervise the financial advisor or other negligence. Silver Law Group has represented investors in FINRA arbitration to recover money from brokers who improperly borrow money from customers, invest customers in personal investments or projects and for breach of fiduciary duty when stockbrokers improperly serve as trustees or beneficiaries of a will or trust.

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms. Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred brokers from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our securities arbitration attorneys have represented investors in claims for theft, churning, improper outside business activities or selling away and other disputes against brokers and brokerage firms. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call us at 800-975-4345 to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

The post FINRA Suspends Registered Individuals For Violations Of FINRA Rules Failure to provide Information January 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

FINRA makes this information available, in part, to inform investors about potential red flags or problems with certain stockbrokers. If you invested with anyone in this report and have questions about your legal rights, our attorneys will talk with you at no cost to explain your legal rights and about how we can help recover your investment losses through securities arbitration or litigation.

FINRA Rule 8210 allows FINRA’s enforcement attorneys the authority to investigate matters under its regulatory purview. FINRA Rule 8210 requires a stockbroker or other registered person of the request to provide documents or information “with respect to any matter in [an] investigation, complaint, examination or proceeding.”

The subject matter of a FINRA investigation or inquiry can include almost anything relating to the brokerage industry or the financial advisor’s activities. FINRA regulatory rules allow for broad authority to investigate violations of FINRA’s rules and regulations including, Rule 2010 (a FINRA member “shall observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade”). Under Rule 2010 FINRA can seek any documents or other information that FINRA believes is relevant to its inquiry.  In 2013, FINRA announced in a regulatory notice that the scope of Rule 8210 had been clarified, stating that “all aspects of the relationship between a broker-dealer and its associated persons are potentially the subject of a Rule 8210 request.”

Securities Arbitration Claims Against Barred Brokers

Even after a broker is barred from the industry or otherwise faces disciplinary action, investors can still pursue stockbroker misconduct claims against their financial advisor and/or their brokerage firms.  Financial Advisors who have engaged in misconduct or otherwise violated FINRA rules or regulations frequently surrender their license rather than cooperate in a FINRA investigation. In the past, FINRA has barred brokers from the industry for participating in Ponzi schemes, elder financial fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and other misconduct. While a bar from the securities industry can be a powerful piece of evidence for investors pursuing FINRA arbitration claims against their advisors and/or their brokerage firms, investors should work with experienced securities and investment fraud attorneys to help maximize their recovery.

FINRA arbitration is separate and distinct from FINRA’s regulatory obligations. In our experience, FINRA regulatory focuses on punishing the wrongdoers but rarely results in compensation for the victims. For investors who have been defrauded by a financial advisor or others, FINRA arbitration is frequently the best place to secure a recover for losses.

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases through FINRA arbitration or court. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide in securities arbitration to help recover investment losses due to stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases handled on a contingent fee basis meaning that you do not pay legal fees unless we are successful.

The post FINRA Bars Stockbrokers For Failing To Provide FINRA With Information January 2026 appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.

In 2021, one of Lansing’s clients named him in a life insurance policy with his approval. Lansing failed to seek the required written permission from Cetera to be named as a beneficiary. The client passed away in July of 2024. In September, Lansing received a payment of $50,000 from the life insurance company. Lansing was not related to this customer and did not seek Cetera’s prior approval to receive the funds. In May of 2025, Cetera discovered the payout. Lansing later repaid the sum to the client’s estate at Cetera’s request.

Lansing stated that he had attempted to remove himself from the policy in March of 2022, but the requested change was never made. A miscommunication with the insurance company was the reason.

After FINRA investigated the matter, Lansing agreed to a seven-month suspension and a $10,000 fine, effective February 3, 2026.

Why Brokers Aren’t Allowed To Be Beneficiaries

Generally, brokers can only be an executor, trustee, or hold power of attorney for a customer if they are immediate family members. If not, the broker must have written permission from the firm.

FINRA’s Rule 3241 specifically prohibits brokers from being one of these and receiving payouts except from their immediate relatives. Meanwhile, FINRA’s Rule 2010 requires brokers to observe “high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.”

In more practical terms, the rules are to protect vulnerable investors from brokers who may not be entirely ethical. The general idea is that a broker or other financial professional should not be intentionally positioned to profit from a client’s demise.

Over time, brokers and RIAs can become close friends with long-term customers. This can lead to birthday and holiday gifts and other personal-level exchanges, which aren’t necessarily prohibited. Even with their firm’s permission and other safeguards in place, wills, life insurance, or other financial payments later could lead to questions of broker impropriety, including undue influence and conflicts of interest.

A person considering adding their broker or investment advisor to their estate plan should, at the very least, mention their intentions if they are still handling the person’s accounts. (This does not apply to a broker not assigned to a specific customer’s accounts.) Advance notice will give them time to either decline being named or work with their firm to get permission ahead of time. Surprising your broker or investment advisor with a sum of money after your passing can cause major headaches for both the named individual and other beneficiaries, such as a spouse, children, or other legal heirs. At the very least, their broker-dealer will require them to return the money to your estate. Other beneficiaries could contest a will or other instrument, leading to expensive estate litigation.

Did You Invest With Thomas Lansing? 

Silver Law Group represents investors in securities and investment fraud cases. Our lawyers are admitted to practice in New York and Florida and represent investors nationwide to help recover investment losses from stockbroker misconduct. If you have any questions about how your account has been handled, call to speak with an experienced securities attorney. Most cases are handled on a contingent fee basis, meaning that you won’t owe us until we recover your money for you. Contact us today at (800) 975-4345 and let us know how we can help.

The post Broker Thomas Lansing Fined And Suspended For Client Bequest appeared first on Securities Arbitration Lawyers Blog.