Financial Advisor James T. Davis has been the Subject of Seven Customer Disputes

• October 16, 2024
• Meridian Wealth Management

James Taylor Davis (CRD#: 6646090) is a registered investment adviser with Meridian Wealth Management, LLC in Lexington, KY. He is also a previously registered broker.

Broker’s History

He entered the securities industry in 2017 and previously worked with Northwestern Mutual Investment Services, LLC.

Current and Past Allegations of Conduct Leading to Investment Loss

According to publicly available records released by U.S Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in August 2019, James Davis became the subject of a customer dispute alleging, “that in or around January 2023, the Representative sold them a variable life insurance policy that did not align with the customer’s goals, and that the Representative did not accurately explain the terms of the policy.” The damage amount requested is $14,500.00 and the customer dispute is still pending.

In addition, James Davis has been the subject of six other customer disputes:

• August 2024—“Customer alleges that in or around August 2023, the Representative misrepresented the terms of a variable life insurance policy and did not sufficiently explain applicable policy fees and the cost of insurance.” The customer dispute settled for $81,000.00.
• April 2024—“Customer alleged Representative misrepresented the terms of a variable life insurance policy and is requesting a refund of premiums paid.” The damage amount requested was $43,072.00 and the customer dispute settled for $42,285.64.
• February 2024—“Customer alleging misrepresentation and suitability concerns with a variable life insurance policy.” The damage amount requested was $24,266.86 and the customer dispute was denied.
• August 2023—“Customer alleged he was not provided with sufficient information about the variable life insurance policy and that the information that was provided was not accurate. As a result the customer is requesting a refund of all premiums paid.” The damage amount requested was $8,060.00 and the customer dispute was withdrawn.
• March 2022—“Customer alleged that in or around January 2021 the Representative failed during the sales process to provide him with a satisfactory understanding of the variable universal life insurance policy purchased.” The damage amount requested was $31,862.00 and the customer dispute settled for $33,179.00.
• May 2021—“Customers allege that from approximately July 2020 to March 2021, the Representative failed to make clear to them the ramifications of signing the policy deliver acknowledgements for two Variable Universal Life insurance policies and that they were not aware the policies were in force. The customers request a full refund of premiums paid into the policies.” The damage amount requested was $25,000.00 and the customer dispute settled for $25,000.00.

For a copy of James Davis’s SEC AdvisorInfo, 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.

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.

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. To the extent any of these duties are breached, the customer may be entitled to a recovery of his or her investment 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.