Newbridge Financial Advisor, Dana Davis, Has Eight Customer Complaints, Including Two Pending Complaints

The Wolper Law Firm, P.A. is currently investigating claims against Dana Davis, a Financial Advisor at Newbridge Securities Corp. in New York, NY. Dana Davis has been in the securities industry since the 1980s and previously worked at First Montauk Securities.

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), on September 5, 2018, a customer filed a complaint against Dana Davis, alleging “CLAIMANT ALLEGES SALE OF UNSUITABLE SECURITIES, USE OF MARGIN, NEGLIGENCE AND BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY.” The alleged damages are $150,000 and the matter remains pending.

This is not Dana Davis’ first customer complaint. She has been the subject of numerous complaints during his career, alleging sales practice violations. Among the complaints against Davis include:

• January 2018—”CLAIMANT ALLEGES AMONG OTHER THINGS, MISREPRESENTATION, UNSUITABLE AND EXCESSIVE TRADING, NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY.” Alleged damages are $299,000 and the matter remains pending.
• October 2007—”CLIENT ALLEGES UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, CHURNING, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION AND NEGLIGENCE IN HIS ACCOUNTS.” The matter was settled for $75,000.
In addition, in 2006, Dana Davis was discharged by First Montauk Securities for
“ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADING AND FAILURE TO FOLLOW FIRM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.”

A For a full copy of Dana Davis’ FINRA disclosure report, click https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1707708#disclosuresSection

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.

If you or someone you know was a customer Dana Davis and you experienced investment losses, please contact the Wolper Law Firm, P.A. at 800.931.8452 or by email at mwolper@wolperlawfirm.com to discuss your specific situation and the legal options available. The Wolper Law Firm, P.A. represents investors nationwide in securities litigation and arbitration.

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.

Newbridge Securities Corp. Financial Advisor, Dana Davis, Has 7 Customer Complaints, Including One Pending Complaint Alleging Fraud And Breach Of Fiduciary Duty

The Wolper Law Firm, P.A. is currently investigating claims against Dana Davis, a Financial Advisor at Newbridge Securities Corp. in New York, NY.  Dana Davis first entered the securities industry in the 1990s and previously worked for First Montauk Securities, Global Capital Securities and Gilford Securities.

According to publicly available records released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Dana Davis has seven (7) customer complaints against her, including one pending complaint.  This is an exceedingly high number of customer complaints against a single Financial Advisor.

https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1707708#disclosuresSection

Among the customer complaints against Dana Davis include the following:

• January 2018—“Claimant alleges among other things, misrepresentation, unsuitable and excessive trading…” Alleged damages are $250,000 and the matter remains pending.
• October 2007—“Client alleges unauthorized trading, churning, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, misrepresentation…” The matter was settled for $75,000.

In addition, in 2002-2003, Dana Davis was the subject of three customer complaints, alleging excessive and unauthorized trading and was subsequently discharged by his employer, First Montauk Securities, for similar conduct.

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.

If you or someone you know was a customer of Samuel Rankin and you experienced investment losses, please contact the Wolper Law Firm, P.A. at 800.931.8452 or by email at mwolper@wolperlawfirm.com to discuss your specific situation and the legal options available.  The Wolper Law Firm, P.A. represents investors nationwide in securities litigation and arbitration.

Matt Wolper, the Managing Principal of the Wolper Law Firm, P.A., is a trial lawyers 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.  Simply put, he knows how the other side evaluates cases, which gives you a competitive advantage.

Financial Advisor Dana H. Davis Suspended by FINRA

Dana H. Davis (CRD#: 1707708) is a previously registered Broker.

Broker’s Background

He entered the securities industry in 1989 and previously worked for Alexander Capital, LP; Newbridge Securities Corporation; First Montauk Securities Corp.; Global Capital Securities Corporation; Gilford Securities Inc.; Josephthal Lyon & Ross, Inc.; Robert Todd Financial Corp,; Global Capital Securities, Inc,; and The Stuart-James Company, 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 March 2023, FINRA sanctioned Dana H. Davis with an order to pay restitution of $75,000, and a suspension from all capacities for 12 months beginning April 3, 2023 and ending April 2, 2024. The FINRA sanction states, “Without admitting or denying the findings, Davis consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he recommended unsuitable use of margin in customer accounts. The findings stated that Davis recommended the extensive use of margin in his customers’ accounts to leverage additional buying power while charging commissions on both buy and sell transactions. Davis’ recommendations to engage in unsuitable trading on margin exposed his customers to significant risk, increased costs, and sizeable losses in their accounts. Davis lacked a reasonable basis to believe that using margin in this way was suitable given the customers’ investment objectives, financial situation, and needs. In total, Davis’ customers realized trading losses of $108,016.82 and paid $150,067.15 in costs, commissions, and margin interest for trades executed on margin in their accounts.”

For a copy of the FINRA sanction, click here.

In addition, Dana H. Davis has been the subject of various other disclosures, including the following:

• August 2021 — “Claimant alleges: overconcentration, misrepresentation, omissions, unsuitable recommendations.” The customer dispute was settled for $14,999.
• September 2018 — “CLAIMANT ALLEGES SALE OF UNSUITABLE SECURITIES, USE OF MARGIN, NEGLIGENCE AND BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY.” The customer dispute was settled for $46,750.
• January 2018 — “CLAIMANT ALLEGES AMONG OTHER THINGS, MISREPRESENTATION, UNSUITABLE AND EXCESSIVE TRADING, NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION AND BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY.” The customer dispute was settled for $55,000.
• October 2011 — “CUSTOMER ALLEGES THAT DURING THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 2009 TO OCTOBER 2011, MR. DAVIS RECOMMENDED AN EXCESSIVE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS IN HER ACCOUNT.” The customer dispute was closed with no action.
• October 2007 — “CLIENT ALLEGES UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, CHURNING, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION AND NEGLIGENCE IN HIS ACCOUNTS.” The customer dispute was settled for %75,000.
• September 2006 — “ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADING AND FAILURE TO FOLLOW FIRM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.” Dana H. Davis was discharged by First Montauk Securities Corp.
• May 2006 — “CUSTOMER ALLEGES EXCESSIVE AND UNAUTHORIZED TRADING IN HIS ACCOUNT.” The customer dispute was settled for $7,500.
• October 2003 — “CUSTOMER ALLEGES UNAUTHORIZED TRADING IN HIS ACCOUNT.” The customer dispute was settled for $1,860.
• June 2002 — “UNSUITABLE TRADES.” The customer dispute was settled for $35,000.
• July 1997 — “CLIENT ALLEGED EXCESSIVE, UNSUITABLE AND UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES IN THEIR ACCOUNT. CLIENTS ARE SEEKING FINANCIAL DAMAGES IN AN AMOUNT OF $194,277.46.” The customer dispute was settled for $45,000.

For a copy of Dana H. Davis’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.

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, 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.