- November 28, 2022
- VCS Venture Securities
Nigel James (CRD#: 4490687) is a registered Broker at VCS Venture Securities in Mineola, NY.
He entered the securities industry in 2002 and previously worked for First Midwest Securities, Inc.; J.P. Turner & Co., LLC; Brundyn Securities, Inc.; LH Ross & Company, Inc.; and Harrison Securities, 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 October 2022, FINRA sanctioned Nigel James, issuing a civil and administrative penalty/fine of $5,000 and a suspension from all capacities for six months beginning November 21, 2022 and ending May 20, 2023. In addition, Nigel James is not required to pay restitution because his member firm has agreed to pay as restitution the commissions and other fees charged to customers as a result of his unsuitable securities recommendations.
The FINRA sanction states, “Without admitting or denying the findings, James consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he engaged in excessive and unsuitable trading in customer accounts. The findings stated that the trades that James recommended resulted in annual cost to equity ratios ranging from more than 21 percent to more than 45 percent, and annual turnover rates ranging from nearly six to more than 14. As a result, the customers collectively had losses in their accounts of approximately $52,000 and paid $77,933.24 in commissions and fees based on the trades James recommended. James’ recommendations were excessive and unsuitable in light of the customers’ investment profiles.”
For a copy of the FINRA sanction, click here.
In addition, Nigel James has been the subject of six other disclosures, including one that remains pending, including the following:
- March 2022 — “WRITTEN CUSTOMER COMPLAINT VIA EMAIL ALLEGING UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASE IN CUSTOMER ACCOUNT.” The customer dispute remains pending, and damages of $55,000 are requested.
- April 2014 — “UNSUITABLE TRANSACTIONS BREACH OF CONTRACT FRAUD CHURNING BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY NEGLIGENCE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH INTERNAL PROCEDURES.” The customer dispute was settled for $88,000.
- January 2013 — “CLIENT ALLEGES CHURNING, NEGLIGENCE,BREACH OF CONTRACT, UNAUTHORIZED TRANSACTIONS,FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS, MARGIN FRAUD, UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MISREPRESENTATION.” The customer dispute was closed with no action.
- July 2009 — “CLIENT ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADE 7/14/08.” The customer dispute was closed with no action.
- December 2008 — “CLIENT ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADE ALTHOUGH HE ADMITS TO AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE. 8/7-8/13/08.” The customer dispute was denied.
- March 2008 — “UNAUTHORIZED TRADE.” The customer dispute was settled for $4,999.99.
For a copy of Nigel James’ 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 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 firstname.lastname@example.org.