Category: Life Insurance

Hanley Law Files FINRA Arbitration Involving broker Ronald Radner Former Registered Representative at the Delray Beach Florida Branch of Edward Jones

Hanley Law recently filed a FINRA arbitration claim alleging that Ronald Radner a broker formerly registered with Edward Jones solicited an elderly client into transferring his investment portfolio to his care after Radner hosted a “free lunch” seminar at a local deli.  The client alleges that Ronald Radner convinced him to surrender his American National annuity and to allow Ronald Radner to manage the funds from the surrendered annuity.  The client alleges that Ronald Radner convinced him that he could earn a greater rate of return on the funds, and therefore would be able to provide him with additional growth and income through retirement.

The client alleges that because of the recommendation of Ronald Radner and Edward Jones he incurred a large surrender charge, and also lost his substantial death benefit of nearly $400,000 when Mr. Radner surrendered his American National Annuity.  Furthermore, the client alleges that he incurred a large tax consequence because of Ronald Radner’s and Edward Jones’ recommendation that he surrender his American National annuity.  Additionally, the client alleges that he lost significant principal on the investments Ronald Radner purchased with his annuity proceeds.

The Boynton Beach, Florida retiree client alleges that Edward Jones violated industry rules, including but not limited to FINRA’s customer suitability standard (Rule 2310) as well as FINRA rules 3010 and 2110. The client further alleges that Edward Jones violated its duty of care and was negligent and that Edward Jones breached the contract it entered into with its client. The client alleges that Edward Jones also breached the fiduciary duty that a securities firm and its employees/agents owe to their clients.  The client alleges that Edward Jones’ misconduct constitutes common law fraud.  Moreover, the client alleges that the accounts at issue were handled negligently and Edward Jones was negligent in their hiring, retention, and supervision of their employees.

According to FINRA’s Brokercheck, Ronald Radner was registered with the securities industry for 9 years, and was registered with the following firm(s) and has multiple customer complaints:

Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
CRD 6694
Delray Beach, FL
3/29/2019 – present

Edward Jones
CRD 250
Delray Beach, FL
9/30/2011 – 4/1/2019

Morgan Stanley Smith Barney
CRD 149777
Delray Beach, FL
10/4/2010 – 9/7/2011

HANLEY LAW

Hanley law represents individual investors nationwide with significant losses in their portfolios, retirement plans or investment accounts.  Hanley Law is dedicated to assisting investors to recover losses suffered by unsuitability, over-concentration, fraud, misrepresentation, self-dealing, unauthorized trades or other wrongful acts, whether intentional or negligent.  Hanley Law represents clients nationwide in cases against the major Wall Street broker dealers, including Edward Jones.

If you have suffered investment losses as a result of your broker’s or brokerage firm’s misconduct, contact Hanley Law to discuss your legal options. Contact Hanley Law at (239)649-0050 or contact us through our Website to arrange a free confidential consultation with an attorney to discuss your experiences with your stock broker which resulted in investment losses.

 

Hanley Law Investigating Claims Involving Fredrik Magnus Virgin and Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith, Inc.

Hanley Law is currently investigating claims against Fredrik Magnus Virgin (CRD No. 2743410) and Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith, Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”) (CRD No.: 7691). The Hanley Law recently filed a FINRA Arbitration claim on behalf of Claimants in which it was alleged that the broker, Fredrick Magnus Virgin, sold an elderly investor a single life Nationwide annuity. On the date of issuance, the investor was 77 years old and legally blind.

The Nationwide Annuity Application lists the investor’s nephew as the primary beneficiary. Furthermore, the application provides that the nephew is to receive 100% of the benefit, confirms that he is the annuitant’s nephew, and also confirms his social security number and birth date. Upon the investor’s passing, the nephew was denied any death benefit payment by Nationwide. Nationwide advised that the annuity contract had a single life payout option which guaranteed the payments for the lifetime of the annuitant only. In a single life payout option, all payments cease with the last payment due prior to the death of the annuitant. Claimants allege that the investor clearly intended to elect a beneficiary to his Nationwide annuity since he completed the beneficiary section on his annuity application and provided all necessary information to elect a beneficiary to his annuity.

The annuity contract at issued was entered into when the investor was 77 years old. The investor lost a significant portion of his originally invested principal, plus the loss of a reasonable return on his investment, because he did not live long enough for his monthly annuity payments to equal to the original purchase price of the annuity. In order for the investor to have broken even on his investment, he would have had to live to be over 85 years old. Claimants allege that there was no reasonable basis to recommend a single life payout annuity to a senior who was 77 years old at the time of purchase. Furthermore, it is alleged that the policy application clearly evidences that it was the investor’s intention to name a beneficiary to the annuity as all the necessary information to elect a beneficiary was provided on the annuity application.

Claimants have alleged that Respondent violated industry rules, including but not limited to FINRA’s customer suitability standard (Rule 2111) as well as FINRA rules 3110 and 2010. Thus, it is alleged that Merrill Lynch violated the duty of care and was negligent. Claimants further allege that Merrill Lynch breached the contract that was entered into and also breached the fiduciary duty that a securities firm and its employees/agents owe to their clients. Claimants alleged that Respondent’s misconduct constitutes common law fraud. Moreover, Claimants allege that the account at issue was handled negligently and Merrill Lynch was negligent in their supervision of Virgin. As such, Claimants allege that Merrill Lynch is liable for their conduct and the conduct of their employees by virtue of the doctrines of agency, respondeat superior, and vicarious liability.

If you were a client of Fredrik Magnus Virgin or Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith, Inc. and have suffered investment losses, please contact the Hanley Law to explore your legal options. The Hanley Law is dedicated to helping investors who have been victims of securities fraud. If you have lost money as a result of securities fraud, you may be able to recover your financial losses. Contact us today toll free at (239) 649-0050 for a free initial consultation.