• December 27, 2023
• D.A. Davidson
• Uncategorized

Andrew David Schell (CRD#:6536347) is a previously registered broker and investment advisor.

Broker’s Background

He entered the securities industry in 2015 and previously worked for Merril Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated and D.A Davidson & Co.

Current and Past Allegations of Conduct Leading to Investment Loss

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in July 2023, Andrew Schell became the subject of a customer dispute alleging, “Registered Representative’s trading strategy in non-discretionary advisory accounts was unsuitable, that he exercised discretion without proper authorization, and that he violated the Care Obligation. 2/4/2020- 2/15/2023.” The damage amount requested was $270,052.09, and the customer dispute settled for $129,750.

In addition, Andrew Schell has been the subject of 19 other disclosures, which include the following:

• November 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative’s trading strategy in non-discretionary advisory accounts was unsuitable, that he exercised discretion without authorization, and did not act in the client’s best interest. 6/25/2020 – 02/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was  $265,000 and the customer dispute was settled for $175,000.
• June 2022—“Clients alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 12/31/2020- 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $36,801 and the customer dispute settled for $36,801.
• May 2022—“Clients alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory account without their written authorization. 2/6/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $32,614 and the customer dispute was settled for $32,614.
• April 2022—“Client alleged RR exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory account without their written authorization. 12/31/2020 – 02/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $23,998 and the customer dispute settled for $23,998.
• April 2022—“Client alleged RR exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 02/13/2020 – 02/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $21,867 and the customer dispute settled for $21,867.
• March 2022—“Client alleged RR exercised discretion in non-discretionary accounts without their written authorization. 08/24/2020 – 02/18/2022.” The damage amount requested is $25,104 and the customer dispute settled for $25,104.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory account without their written authorization. 2/11/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $40,566 and the customer dispute settled for $40,566.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 1/8/2021 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $18,910 and the customer dispute settled for $18,910.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 1/7/2021 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $29,036 and the customer dispute settled for $29,036.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory account without their written authorization. 10/21/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $58,722 and the customer dispute settled for $58,722.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory account without their written authorization. 2/4/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $19,829 and the customer dispute was settled for $19,829.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 2/5/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $50,737 and the customer dispute was settled for $50,737.
• March 2022—“Client alleged Registered Representative exercised discretion in non-discretionary advisory accounts without their written authorization. 4/22/2020 – 2/28/2022.” The damage amount requested was $40,287 and the customer dispute settled for $40,287.
• February 2022—“Prior to the RR’s termination, clients alleged poor performance, a failure to follow instructions and made claims for damages. Upon review of the allegations, the Firm identified that the RR failed to timely report customer complaints, communicated with customers through prohibited methods, and it was alleged that he exercised discretion in some non-discretionary advisory accounts without customers’ written authorization.”- Discharged by D.A Davison & Co.
• February 2022—“Client expressed disappointment in losses and account performance and made a claim for damages. 1/13/2021 – 02/07/2022.” The customer dispute settled for $18,330.86.
• February 2022—“Third Party expressed disappointment in losses and account performance and made a claim for damages. It was later determined that the client was aware of and authorized the complaint. 1/22/2021 – 2/7/2022.” The customer dispute settled for $12,141.29.
• January 2022—“Client expressed frustration that his request to liquidate his account was not followed and caused additional losses. It was later determined that the RR took discretion in a non-discretionary advisory account with certain activity. 12/27/2021 – 01/27/2022.” The customer dispute settled for $18,088.
• January 2022—“Client expressed disappointment in losses and account performance. 2/10/2021 – 1/19/2022.” The customer dispute settled for $43,818.07.
• January 2022—“Client expressed disappointment in losses and account performance. 2/10/2021 – 1/19/2022.” The customer dispute was settled for $25,842.34.

For a copy of Andrew Schells FINRA BrokerCheck, click here.

We Help Investors Recover Investment Losses

FINRA regulations require that a customer’s written authorization is required before a broker-dealer can carry out transactions in the customer’s account. In addition, the broker-dealer’s member firm needs to approve the broker-dealer’s authorization. These measures are intended to protect the customer. Discretionary trading allows the broker-dealer to unilaterally decide to buy or sell securities at any price and not have to check with the client first. Exercising discretion without authorization can be costly to investors, and broker-dealers and their member firms, too.

 

In addition, to the extent a Financial Advisor converts client assets during the course and scope of his employment and/or registration with the brokerage firm, that brokerage firm may be held liable for any attendant losses.

 

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.