Erez Law is currently investigating former Morgan Stanley financial advisor Andrew Yocum (CRD# 4590723) regarding unauthorized transactions, use of discretion without written authorization, and recommending unsuitable concentrated purchases of energy-sector securities to senior investors. Yocum has been registered with Summit Brokerage Services, Inc. in Lady Lake, Florida from December 2015 to March 2016. Previously, he was registered with Morgan Stanley in The Villages, Florida from 2009 to 2015, when he was terminated regarding, “Allegations concerning acting on verbal discretion.”
In March 2017, the Florida Office of Financial Regulation filed a complaint against Yocum after allegation regarding, “Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade; Suitability; and Placing Traded in Client Accounts Without Authorization.”
In May 2016, FINRA barred Yocum after he refused to appear for FINRA on-the-record testimony in connection with an investigation into whether he effected unauthorized transactions, exercised discretion without written authorization, and recommended unsuitable concentrated purchases of energy sector securities to senior investors.
Yocum has been the subject of 33 customer complaints between 2015 and 2017, according to his CRD report:
- August 2017. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments in accounts – 2009 to 2015..” The case is currently pending.
- February 2017. “Claimant alleges, inter alia, that the FA made misrepresentations regarding unsuitable investments.” The case was settled for $55,000.
- February 2017. “Claimants allege, inter alia, that the FA made unsuitable investment recommendations..” The case is currently pending.
- February 2017. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments – 2012 to 2015.” The case is currently pending.
- January 2017. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments – 2014 to 2015.” The case was settled for $42,500.
- January 2017. “Claimants allege, inter alia, that the FA over-concentrated the client’s portfolio with unsuitable investments.” The customer sought $500,000 in damages and the case was settled for $75,000.
- December 2016. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments – 2013 to 2014.” The case was settled for $45,000.
- November 2016. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments in retirement account – 20013 to 2016.” The customer is seeking $124,055 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- October 2016. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments in trust account – 2007 to 2015.” The customer sought $92,326 in damages and the case was settled for $45,000.
- September 2016. “Client’s attorney alleges unsuitable recommendations in the energy sector 2014 – September (SP) 2015.” The customer sought $370,000 in damages and the case was settled for $67,500.
- August 2016. “Claimant alleged unsuitability, inter alia, with respect to investments in account- November 2013 to February 2015.” The customer sought $43,098 in damages and the case was settled for $24,999.
- August 2016. “Claimant alleged unsuitability, inter alia, with respect to investments in managed account- 2011 to 2015.” The customer sought $163,209.16 in damages and the case was settled for $18,073.
- August 2016. “Claimants allege, inter alia, that beginning in 2007 the FA made unsuitable recommendations and invested their resources in a manner that was not consistent with their investment objectives.” The customer sought $100,000 in damages and the case was settled for $22,500.
- August 2016. “Client’s allege, inter alia, that the purchase of an annuity was not in their best interest. August 2013. Damages unspecified.” The case was settled for $10,000.
- August 2016. “Client verbally alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments made in managed account – August 2013 to September 2015.” The case was settled for $17,000.
- July 2016. “Client alleges that investments purchased for him were not suitable. 2012-2013 damages unspecified.” The case was settled for $2,000.
- July 2016. “Claimant alleges, inter alia, that from December 2013 to August 2015 the FA made unsuitable investments in the client’s accounts.” The customer sought $40,000 in damages and the case was settled for $14,999.99.
- June 2016. “Clients allege unsuitability with respect to investments – 2013 – September 2015.” The customer sought $65,000 in damages and the case was settled for $35,000.
- May 2016. “Claimant allege, inter alia, that from 2012 to 2015 the FA made unsuitable investments in the client’s accounts.” The customer sought $141,000 in damages and the case was settled for $70,000.
- April 2016. “Claimants alleged, inter alia, that investments in account were unsuitable – 2010 to 2015.” The customer is seeking $361,683 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- February 2016. “Claimants allege, inter alia, that from March 2012 to September 2015 the FA made unsuitable investment recommendations.” The customer sought $54,850 in damages and the case was settled for $35,975.
- February 2016. “Client verbally alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments in account – June 2014 to November 2015.” The case was settled for $30,000.
- February 2016. “Clients allege the losses in their accounts were due to the fa’s detrimental actions. August 2014 – September 2015. Damages unspecified.” The case was settled for $12,000.
- February 2016. “Claimant alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to investments in accounts- December 2011 to October 2015.” The customer sought $200,000 in damages and the case was settled for $70,000.
- February 2016. “Clients’ attorney alleges unsuitability with respect to investments – December 2013 – October 2015.” The customer sought $46,300 in damages and the case was settled for $22,000.
- January 2016. “Clients’ attorney alleges that the clients’ accounts were overconcentrated in oil & gas related securities. 2013-2015.” The customer is seeking $30,000 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- January 2016. “Clients’ attorney alleges that the clients’ accounts were overconcentrated in oil & gas related securities. 2009-2015.” The customer is seeking $70,000 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- January 2016. “Clients’ attorney alleges that the clients’ accounts were overconcentrated in oil & gas related securities. 2009-2015.” The customer is seeking $60,000 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- January 2016. “Client alleges that her account was over concentrated in energy stocks 2012-2015.” The case is currently pending.
- November 2015. “Clients daughter alleges unsuitability with respect to investments – June 2012 – September 2015. Damages unspecified.” The case is currently pending.
- October 2015. “Client complained about losses he incurred in his fixed income energy holdings and he alleges that the FA recommended transactions solely to generate commissions.” The case was settled for $20,000.
- June 2015. “Claimant alleged, inter alia, unsuitability with respect to recommendations and investments made in the accounts – 2011 to 2014.” The customer sought $98,500 in damages and the case was settled for $30,000.
- May 2015. “Clients allege that energy stocks purchased in their managed IRA accounts were unsuitable. 2012-2015 damages unspecified.” The case was settled for $33,698.
Pursuant to FINRA Rules, member firms are responsible for supervising a broker’s activities during the time the broker is registered with the firm. Therefore, Morgan Stanley may be liable for investment or other losses suffered by Yocum’s customers.
Erez Law represents investors in the United States for claims against former Morgan Stanley financial advisor Andrew Yocum, regarding unauthorized transactions, use of discretion without written authorization, and recommending unsuitable concentrated purchases of energy sector securities to senior investors. If you were a client of Morgan Stanley or another firm, and have experienced investment losses, please call us at 888-840-1571 or complete our contact form for a free consultation. Erez Law is a nationally recognized law firm representing individuals, trusts, corporations and institutions in claims against brokerage firms, banks and insurance companies on a contingency fee basis.
"*" indicates required fields
