fbpx

Former Cambridge Investment Financial Advisor Dale Wright Has Ten Customer Complaints

Dale Wright (CRD#: 1142615) is a previously registered Broker and previously registered Investment Advisor.

Broker’s Background

He entered the securities industry in 1983 and previously worked for Cambridge Investment Research, Inc.; Sanders Morris Harris, Inc.; QA3 Financial Corp.; National Planning Corporation; Centennial Capital Management, Inc.; and First American National Securities, Inc.

Current And Past Allegations Of Conduct Leading To Investment Loss

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Dale Wright has ten disclosed customer complaints, alleging sales practice misconduct. According to the disclosures, customers have alleged the following:

  • in August 2021, a customer dispute against Dale Wright was closed with no action. The allegation states, “Client alleged poor recommendation in relation to the purchase of life insurance policies and recommended investment strategies.”
  • January 2019 — “Client alleges violation of the Virginia Securities Act, fraud, negligent representation, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsuitability.” The customer dispute was settled for $40,000.
  • September 2018 — “Clients allege they have incurred damages resulting from unsuitable investment strategies marketed to them.” The customer dispute was settled for $27,500.
  • June 2018 — “Claimants allege RR recommended a ruinous investment strategy where they leveraged their home equity to purchase whole life insurance policies, then advised to borrow from the insurance policies and invest the borrowed funds in an investment account.” The customer dispute was settled for $65,000.
  • January 2018 — “Claimants allege advisor recommended them to purchase life insurance policies and borrow against the policies. In addition to the life insurance, Claimants allege the advisor recommended they refinance their home and invest additional funds from that transaction. Claimants allege advisor made unsuitable recommendations and misrepresentations with respect to the purchase of life insurance to provide funds for investment in other securities.” The customer dispute was settled for $190,000.
  • January 2018 — “Claimants allege advisor recommended them to purchase life insurance policies and borrow against the policies. In addition to the life insurance, Claimants allege the advisor recommended they refinance their home and invest additional funds from that transaction. Claimants allege advisor made unsuitable recommendations and misrepresentations with respect to the purchase of life insurance to provide funds for investment in other securities.” The customer dispute was settled for $190,000.
  • March 2017 — “Client alleges violation of Virginia Securities Act, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, negligent supervision and breach of contract relating to life insurance policies.” The customer dispute was settled for $70,000.
  • June 2015 — “CLIENTS ALLEGE THAT THEY WERE DAMAGED BY SALE OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES AND THE SUBSEQUENT ADVICE TO BORROW AGAINST THE CASH VALUE AND INVEST IN THE STOCK MARKET.” The customer dispute was settled for $50,000.
  • February 2015 — “CLIENT ALLEGES THAT RR MISREPRESENTED A LIFE INSURANCE POLICY AND THAT RR SOLD HER A POLICY THAT WAS UNSUITABLE.” The customer dispute was settled for 412,700.
  • April 2005 — “CLIENT ALLEGES UNSUITABILITY AND USE OF HOME EQUITY TO PURCHASE SECURITIES.” The customer dispute was settled for $125,000.

In addition, in July 2019, Dale Wright was sanctioned by the State of Virginia Bureau of Insurance. “The Bureau alleges that the advisor encouraged clients to purchase Life Insurance Policies for the purposes of using the policies as investment tools, violated Code of Virginia sections 38.2502(1) and (7), 38.2-1831 (1) and 14 VAC 5-41-30.” The Commonwealth of Virginia State Corporation Commission Bureau of Insurance issued a civil and administrative penalty/fine of $50,000, ordered restitution of $16,300, and placed Dale Wright on probation with the Bureau through June 30, 2021.

For a copy of Dale Wright’s FINRA BrokerCheck, click here.

We Help Investors Recover Investment Losses

Financial advisors have a legal and regulatory obligation to recommend only suitable investments that are appropriate for their clients’ needs and objectives. Their employing brokerage firm has a legal and regulatory obligation to supervise the Financial Advisors’ sales practices and dealings with clients. To the extent any of these duties are breached, the customer may be entitled to a recovery of his or her investment losses.

Reasonable basis suitability requires that a recommended investment or investment strategy be suitable or appropriate for at least some investors. Reasonable basis suitability requires an advisor to conduct adequate due diligence so that he or she can determine the risks and rewards of the investment or investment strategy.

Quantitative suitability requires a brokerage firm or financial advisor with actual or de facto control over a customer’s account to have a reasonable basis for believing that a series of recommended transactions – even if suitable when viewed in isolation – is not excessive and unsuitable for the customer when taken together in light of the customer’s investment profile. No single test defines excessive activity, but factors such as the turnover rate, the cost-equity ratio, and the use of in-and-out trading in a customer’s account may provide a basis for a finding that a member or associated person has violated the quantitative suitability obligation.

Customer-specific suitability requires that a member or associated person have a reasonable basis to believe that the recommendation is suitable for a particular customer based on that customer’s investment profile. Among the criteria that a financial advisor must evaluate to satisfy his or her customer-specific suitability obligations include the investor’s age, tax status, time horizon, liquidity needs, and risk tolerance; a client’s other investments, financial situation and needs, investment objectives, and any other information disclosed by the customer should also be considered.

The Wolper Law Firm represents investors nationwide in securities litigation and arbitration on a contingency fee basis.  Matt Wolper, the Managing Principal of the Wolper Law Firm, is a trial lawyer who has handled hundreds of securities cases during his career involving a wide range of products, strategies and securities. Prior to representing investors, he was a partner with a national law firm, where he represented some of the largest banks and brokerage firms in the world in securities matters. We can be reached at (800) 931-8452 or by email at mwolper@wolperlawfirm.com.

Attorney Matthew Wolper

Attorney Matthew WolperMatt Wolper is a trial lawyer who focuses exclusively on securities litigation and arbitration. Mr. Wolper has handled hundreds of securities matters nationwide before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), American Arbitration Association (“AAA”), JAMS, and in state and federal court. Mr. Wolper has handled and tried cases involving complex financial products and strategies ranging from traditional stocks and bonds to options, margin and other securities-based lending products, closed/open-end mutual funds, structured products, hedge funds, and penny stocks. [Attorney Bio]