Identifying a Tort Claim Against Brokerage Firms, Financial Advisors, and Financial Institutions

Investors may have grounds to file a tort claim against brokerage firms, financial advisors, and other financial institutions for various misconducts. Here are some common tort claims that investors might pursue, along with relevant acts and regulations that govern these claims:

1. Fraudulent Misrepresentation

Definition: Fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when a financial advisor or brokerage firm intentionally provides false information or withholds material facts, causing the investor to make decisions based on that misinformation.

Relevant Acts:

  • Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Specifically, Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 prohibit any act or omission resulting in fraud or deceit in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.

  • Investment Advisers Act of 1940: Section 206 makes it unlawful for an investment adviser to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which is fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative.

Example Case: If a financial advisor knowingly recommends a high-risk investment as safe and suitable for a conservative investor, leading to significant financial loss.

2. Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Definition: Financial advisors and brokerage firms owe a fiduciary duty to their clients, meaning they must act in the best interest of the client with loyalty and care. Breach of this duty occurs when they fail to meet these obligations.

Relevant Acts:

  • Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974: Imposes fiduciary duties on those who manage employee benefit plans and their assets.

  • Common Law: Many fiduciary duties are also defined and enforced under state common law.

Example Case: An advisor places a client’s assets in investments that generate higher commissions for the advisor rather than those that are in the client’s best interest.

3. Negligence

Definition: Negligence involves the failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances. In financial contexts, this can mean failing to conduct adequate research before making investment recommendations.

Relevant Acts:

  • Common Law Negligence: This claim is usually based on state common law principles, requiring the plaintiff to prove that the advisor owed a duty of care, breached that duty, and caused damages as a result.

Example Case: A financial advisor fails to diversify an investor’s portfolio adequately, leading to significant losses when a single investment performs poorly.

4. Churning

Definition: Churning is the excessive trading in a client’s account primarily to generate commissions for the broker, rather than to benefit the client’s investment strategy.

Relevant Acts:

  • Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 also cover churning as a form of securities fraud.

  • FINRA Rules: Rule 2111 (Suitability) and Rule 2020 (Use of Manipulative, Deceptive or Other Fraudulent Devices) are particularly relevant.

Example Case: A broker frequently buys and sells securities in a client’s account without regard to the client’s investment objectives, resulting in high commissions and substantial losses.

5. Unauthorized Trading

Definition: Unauthorized trading occurs when a broker or financial advisor makes trades in a client’s account without the client’s permission or authorization.

Relevant Acts:

  • Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Section 15(c)(1) prohibits brokers from effecting transactions without the customer’s consent.

  • FINRA Rules: Rule 4512 (Customer Account Information) requires brokers to obtain written authorization for discretionary trading.

Example Case: A broker executes trades in an investor’s account without discussing them with the investor first or obtaining the investor's consent.

Remedies

If an investor suffers losses due to any of the above misconducts, they can seek remedies including:

  • Compensatory Damages: Reimbursement for financial losses incurred due to the misconduct.

  • Punitive Damages: In cases of particularly egregious conduct, punitive damages may be awarded to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar behavior.

  • Rescission: This remedy involves canceling the investment transaction and returning both parties to their pre-transaction status.

  • Disgorgement: Requiring the financial advisor or brokerage firm to return any ill-gotten gains resulting from the misconduct.

Conclusion

Investors have several avenues for legal recourse when wronged by brokerage firms, financial advisors, or financial institutions. Understanding the relevant tort claims and regulatory frameworks can empower investors to take action against misconduct and seek appropriate remedies. If you believe you have a valid claim, consulting with a securities litigation attorney can help you navigate the complexities of these legal issues and protect your financial interests.

related articles