fbpixel
888-840-1571

National Investment Fraud Lawyers

¿Perdió en bonos y fondos de Puerto Rico?

Did You Suffer Investment Losses from LPL Financial LLC Financial Advisor Karl Horace Romero?

Posted on Monday, March 20th, 2017 at 4:01 pm    

Erez Law is currently investigating LPL Financial LLC financial advisor Karl Horace Romero (CRD# 403473) regarding unsuitable investment recommendations. Romero was registered with LPL Financial in Santa Ana, California from 1989 to 2016. Romero is currently not registered with any brokerage firm.

Romero has been the subject of 16 customer complaints between 1993 and 2016, according to his CRD report:

September 2016. “Customer, through their attorney, alleges that they suffered losses as a result of unsuitable investment recommendations.” The customer is seeking $250,000 in damages and the case is currently pending.

June 2016. “Customers, through their attorneys, alleges negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with their investments.” The customer sought $125,000 in damages and the case was settled for $65,000.

June 2016. “Customer, through her attorney, allge that she suffered losses as a result of unsuitable and over concentrated investment recommendations.” The customer sought $104,19 in damages and the case was settled for $55,000.

April 2016. “Customer, throuh (sp) their attorney, alleges that they suffered losses as a result of unsuitable investment recommendations.” The customer is seeking $195,521 in damages.

April 2016. “Customers, through their attorneys, allege that they suffered losses as a result of unsuitable investment recommendations.” The customer is seeking $350,000 in damages.

August 2015. “Customer alleges that the financial advisor made unsuitable investment recommendations.” The customer sought $125,000 in damages and the case was denied.

June 2015. “Customers, through their attorneys, alleges negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with their investments.” The customer sought $115,235 in damages and the case was settled for $120,000.

March 2014. “Customer, through their attorneys, alleges negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with their investments.” The customer sought $112,500 in damages and the case was settled for $10,000.

December 2013. “Customers, through their attorneys, alleges misrepresentation, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.” The customer sought $67,677 in damages and the case was settled for $24,999.

December 2013. “Customer, through their attorneys, alleges negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with their investments.” The customer sought $300,000 in damages and the case was settled for $115,000.

December 2013. “Customers, through their attorneys, alleges misrepresentation, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.” The customer sought $313,010.18 in damages and the case was settled for $160,000.

December 2013. “Customers, through their attorneys, alleges misrepresentation, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.” The customer sought $249,000 in damages and the case was settled for $130,000.

September 2013. “Customer, through their attorney, alleges unsuitable investments in a variety of alternative investments.” The customer sought $343,596 in damages and the case was settled for $14,999.

November 2009. “In the midst of pending contested divorce matter, customer/wife of representative alleges that representative signed her name as co-trustee to redemption authorization document in january of 2009 in order to redeem jointly-owned trust’s reit investment in the amount of $60,000. Representative maintains that the redemption had been disclosed and was reviewed and noted over time in connection with ongoing divorce and asset division proposals. At this time, in connection with divorce resolution, the trust’s reit investment interest was assigned to representative for ownership purposes.” The customer sought $30,000 in damages and the case was denied.

January 1994. “Investors alleged breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the purchase of five limited partnerships, real estate investment trusts and private placement. Investments total $343,177.00 investors sought full recovery plus $243,666.00 representing lost interest/profits. Total damages sought: $586,843. Investors alleged the portfolio was not diversified or sufficiently liquid for their needs.” The customer sought $343,177 in damages and the case was settled for $45,000.

March 1993. “Suitability action. Claimant sought $67,000 in alleged damages, plus interest, attorneys’ fees and punitive damages.” The case was settled for $67,000.

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, LPL Financial LLC may be liable for investment or other losses suffered by Romero’s customers.

Erez Law represents investors in the United States for claims against LPL Financial LLC financial advisor Karl Horace Romero, who is alleged to make unsuitable investment recommendations. If you were a client of LPL Financial LLC financial advisor Karl Horace Romero 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.