• December 20, 2021
• Joseph Stone Capital

Douglas J. Rosenberg (CRD#: 3214215) is a registered Broker at Joseph Stone Capital, LLC in Hauppauge, NY.

Broker’s Background

Douglas J. Rosenberg entered the securities industry in 2000 and previously worked for First Midwest Securities, Inc.; Newbridge Securities Corporation; Securities Service Network, Inc.; Cantella & Co., Inc.; Raike Financial Group, Inc.; and GBI Capital Partners, Inc.

Current And Past Allegations Of Conduct Leading To Investment Loss

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in December 2021, FINRA sanctioned Douglas J. Rosenberg, ordering him to pay restitution  of $25,000, and suspending him from all capacities for seven months beginning January 3, 2022 and ending August 2, 2022. The FINRA sanction states, “Without admitting or denying the findings, Rosenberg consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he excessively and unsuitably traded customers’ accounts. The findings stated that Rosenberg engaged in excessive and unsuitable trading in the accounts of three customers. As a result of Rosenberg’s unsuitable recommendations, his customers suffered a total of over $154,000 in realized losses and paid a total of $89,652 in commissions, trading costs and margin interest.”

For a copy of the FINRA sanction, click here.

In addition, Douglas J. Rosenberg has been the subject of four customer complaints, including the following:

• June 2021 – A civil judgment/lien was imposed upon Douglas J. Rosenberg in the amount of $45,068.01.
• May 2013 – “EXCESSIVE & UNNECESSARY TRADING ON MARGIN WITH NO DOWNSIDE PROTECTION, FALSE & MISLEADING STATEMENTS,FRAUD, NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY & BREACH OF THE COVENANTS OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING,NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION,BREACH OF CONDUCT.” The customer dispute was settled for $25,000.
• July 2012 – “Violation of Texas Securities Act 581-33; breach of fiduciary duty; common law fraud; breach of contract; restitution; negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and omission.” Damages of $296,071 were awarded to the customer. For a copy of the arbitration details, click here.
• May 2008 – “CLIENT MADE A VERBAL CLAIM THAT THERE WERE UNAUTHORIZED TRADES IN HIS ACCOUNT.” The customer dispute was settled for $17,500.
• June 2007 – “CLIENT CALLED AND CLAIMED REP MISREPRESENTED THE VALUE OF HIS ACCOUNT BY $30,000. IN A SUBSEQUENT LETTER SENT BY CLIENT, HE ALSO STATED ANY AND ALL RECENT TRANSACTIONS WERE UNAUTHORIZED, BUT NEVER MENTIONED THAT DURING 2 PHONE CALLS WITH THE BRANCH MANAGER.” The customer dispute was denied.

For a copy of Douglas J. Rosenberg’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.

Excessive trading often occurs when a Financial Advisor puts his or her interests ahead of the clients and makes transactions solely for the purpose of generating commissions. Financial Advisors have a regulatory duty to recommend suitable investment strategies. One of the components of the suitability analysis is quantitative suitability.

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. 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.

The Wolper Law Firm, P.A. represents investors nationwide in securities litigation and arbitration on a contingency fee basis.  Matt Wolper, the Managing Principal of the Wolper Law Firm, P.A., 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.