fbpx

Great Point Capital Financial Advisor Chad Barancyk Has Ten Customer Complaints

Chad Barancyk (CRD#: 4921433) is a dually registered Broker and Investment Advisor at Great Point Capital, LLC in Chicago, IL.

Broker’s Background

He entered the securities industry in 2005 and previously worked for Great Point Advisors, LLC; Cetera Investment Advisers, LLC; First Allied Securities, Inc.; First Allied Advisory Services, Inc.; and SII Investments, 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 February 2022, a customer dispute was filed against Chad Barancyk. The allegation states, “Claimants allege their financial adviser recommended investments that were unsuitable for them. Claimants generally allege unsuitability, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and negligence.”

In addition, Chad Barancyk has been the subject of nine additional customer complaints, including seven that remain pending, including the following:

  • February 2022 — “Claimant alleges that she was recommended to invest in unsuitable alternative investment.” Damages of $259,330 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • September 2021 — “Claimants generally allege negligence, misrepresentation, failure to supervise, and breach of contract.” Damages of $500,000 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • August 2021 — “Claimant generally alleges suitability, misrepresentation, respondeat superior, and failure to supervise.” Damages of $53,000 are requested.
  • June 2021 — “Claimants allege former registered representative recommended unsuitable alternative investments and REITs.” Damages of $100,000 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • May 2021 — “Claimant alleges former registered representative recommended unsuitable alternative investments and REITs.” Damages of $500,000 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • May 2021 — “Claimants allege former registered representative recommended unsuitable alternative investments and REITs.” Damages of $200,000 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • August 2020 — “Claimant alleges that her financial advisor recommended unsuitable investments and failed to properly diversify her portfolio. Claimant generally alleges breach of duties and contract and failure to supervise.” Damages of $250,000 are requested. The customer dispute is pending.
  • June 2017 — “Respondent Barancyk failed to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.” FINRA suspended Chad Barancyk from all capacities from June 27, 2017 until June 30, 2017.
  • April 2013 — “CLIENT ALLEGES REP DID NOT FULFILL PROMISES IN INVESTING HIS ROLLOVER 2008 TO PRESENT.” The customer dispute was denied.
  • May 2011 — “CLIENT CLAIMS THAT HER REPRESENTATIVES RECOMMENDED SHE TRANSFER THE VARIABLE PORTION OF HER PENSION TO AN IRA WHICH VOIDED HER MONTHLY PENSION BENEFITS.” The customer dispute was denied.

For a copy of Chad Barancyk’s FINRA BrokerCheck, click here.

We Help Investors Recover Investment Losses

A Real Estate Investment Trust, or “REIT”, is an investment company that raises capital from investors for the purpose of acquiring real estate. Some REIT’s are publicly traded and can be easily bought and sold in the stock market. Other REITs are privately held and referred to as “Non-Traded.”

Non-Traded REITs are securities that do not trade on a public securities exchange. For this reason, Non-Traded REITs can be illiquid, meaning investors may be unable to sell their investments on demand. The underlying collateral of the REITs consists of income producing residential or commercial real estate. Typically, the commissions generated on Non-Traded REITs are higher than industry norm (approx. 7%) and the investments themselves may be subject to extreme volatility due to associated risk factors. Non-Traded REITs are only suitable for investors with a long-term investment horizon who are willing to accept higher levels of risk in their investments.

The prospectus for Non-Traded REITs confirm that these securities carry a high degree of risk and that their income stream is subject to fluctuation or suspension. In recent years, Non-Traded REITs have been oversold by brokerages and many of the Non-Traded REITs have suspended dividends. When this has occurred, the principal value of the Non-Traded REITs is impacted. Because Non-Traded REITs are illiquid, investors have no way to sell the investment and limit their loss.

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]