• March 7, 2020
• First Standard Financial Company
• National Securities Corp.

Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis (CRD # 1417097) was a Financial Advisor at Paulson Investment Company (2019-2020), First Standard Financial Company (2015-2019) and National Securities Corp. (2012-2015) in Red Bank, New Jersey. Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis has been in the securities industry since since 2000. Prior to working at the aforementioned brokerage firms, Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis was registered with Brookstone Securities and Newbridge Securities Corp.

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), on March 3, 2020, FINRA sanctioned Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis, barring him from associating with a brokerage firm for alleged sales practice misconduct. According to the FINRA sanction, “Without admitting or denying the findings, Davis consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to produce information or documents requested by FINRA in connection with an investigation into allegations that he engaged in excessive and unsuitable trading in customer accounts while associated with his member firm.”

For a copy of the FINRA sanction, click https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/fda_documents/2018057640301%20Andre%20Pierre%20Davis%20CRD%201417097%20AWC%20va.pdf.

In addition, Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis has fifteen customer complaint disclosures, alleging sales practice misconduct, including six pending complaints. Among the complaints against Andre Pierre Davis aka Andre Davis, including the following:

• August 2019—”EXCESSIVE TRADING, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, & UNAUTHORIZED TRADES.” Alleged damages are $350,000 and the matter remains pending.
• June 2019—”Claimant alleged churning, unauthorized trading and poor performance.” Alleged damages are $152,400 and the matter remains pending.
• May 2019—”UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, EXCESSIVE TRADING, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS.” Alleged damages are $461,000 and the matter remains pending.
• April 2019—”Excessive Trading, Unauthorized Trading.” Alleged damages are $300,000 and the matter remains pending.
• April 2019—”EXCESSIVE TRADING, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS.” Alleged damages are $238,135 and the matter remains pending.
• February 2019—”UNAUTHORIZED TRADING & SUITABILITY.” Alleged damages are $668,000 and the matter remains pending.

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
• Other investments
• Financial situation and needs
• Tax status
• Investment objectives
• Time horizon
• Liquidity needs
• Risk tolerance
• Any other information disclosed by the customer

Failure by a financial advisor to adhere to these requirements is evidence of negligence or, worse, investment fraud. If you as the investor can establish, at a minimum, negligent misconduct, you may be entitled to recovery your investment losses.

Unauthorized trading is strictly prohibited by FINRA rules. Before a transaction can be entered in a customer account, the Financial Advisor must first obtain verbal or written authorization from the client. In the absence of authorization, the transaction is subject to rescission by the customer.

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.