The investment lawyers at Gana Weinstein LLP, have experience helping investors determine whether their portfolio losses at investment firms, such as Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Charles Schwab) were caused by broker misconduct. There are many different way that your broker can impermissibly drain your accounts, such as: churning, unauthorized transactions, breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable investment advice, and unauthorized trading. Our attorneys can help you understand the cause of your financial losses, uncover misconduct, and apply the law to hold accountable those responsible.
Formed in 1971, Charles Schwab is a San Francisco, California based banking a brokerage company with over 300 offices in the United States. As of 2011, Charles Schwab served approximately 7.9 million client accounts holding $1.65 trillion in assets.
Charles Schwab - By the Numbers:In the Matter of FINRA v. Charles Schwab & Co. Complaint No. 2011029760201 a FINRA hearing panel fined Charles Schwab $500,000 and ordered it to cease using anti-consolidation language in its customer agreements that would prevent customers from joining into class-actions. Had the panel allowed the language to remain, Charles Schwab could have circumvented one of investors’ greatest tools to curb broker misconduct through a contract of adhesion.
In the Matter of SEC v. Charles Schwab Investment Management Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-14184 The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reached a settlement of $119 Million with Charles Schwab, its entities and executives over the marketing of the Schwab YieldPlus Fund, a mutual fund heavily invested in mortgage-backed securities. The SEC alleged that: Charles Schwab misled investors by offering the Schwab YieldPlus Fund as an alternative to cash; deviated from the Fund’s listed concentration policy by over concentrating in mortgage-backed securities without obtaining shareholder approval; made further misstatements about the Schwab Yield Plus Fund while its net asset value declined; and failed to establish and implement internal controls reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material nonpublic information.
In the matter of SEC v. Charles Schwab & Co. March 18, 1983. In a public administrative proceeding the SEC alleged that Charles Schwab allows a customer trader to violate section 17(A) of the 1933 Act and Section 10(B) of the 1934 Act by inducing members of the Public to pay him at least $500,000 of funds, which the broker then converted to his own use. The Administrative Law Judge found that Charles Schwab failed to adequately supervise the broker.
Gana Weinstein LLP has successfully litigated broker disputes through verdict or settlement. We represent both individuals and institutions throughout the country in FINRA arbitration, as well as commercial litigation in state and federal courts. Our consultations are both free and thorough and our securities litigation attorneys can help you uncover wrongful activity in your account.