An Indianapolis investment adviser and broker Daniel Brunette (also known as Daniel Edward Brunette) is the subject of a customer dispute disclosure initiated on allegations including unsuitability of investment recommendations, fraud and inadequate due diligence among others, according to an investigation by attorney Alan Rosca.
Investor attorney Alan Rosca, of Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm is investigating allegations of unsuitability of investment recommendations, fraud, and inadequate due diligence filed by a customer of broker Daniel Brunette. Investors who believe they have been a victim of broker misconduct such as alleged unsuitability or fraud, may contact Alan Rosca at 888-998-0530, arosca@rscounsel.law, or though the contact form on this page for a free, no obligation case evaluation.
Daniel Edward Brunette is currently registered as a broker with First Allied Securities since October, 2012. He is also registered with Cetera Investment Advisers, as an investment adviser since November, 2020. Both are member firms of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
Concerned about investments with
Indianapolis Broker Daniel Brunette Currently Has 23 Disclosures on His Brokercheck
Publicly available information reviewed by the investor attorney Alan Rosca, revealed that as of date of this article Dan Brunette has several customer disputes disclosures on similar allegations, and regulatory actions, according to the disclosures on his FINRA Brokercheck page.
Dan Brunette Has Customer Dispute Disclosure Involving A Variable Annuity Product
According to the reports, the customer dispute was disclosed on July 1, 2020. The client in this dispute made general allegations of unsuitability. The client also alleged fraud and there was a failure to supervise. According to the brokercheck report, First Allied Securities was the employing firm when the activities occurred, and Brunnette’s client is seeking to recover $100,000.01 as damages from this dispute involving a variable annuity.
Brunette Has A History of Alleged Misrepresentations
In April 2005, a Brunette’s customer complained about misrepresentation of Variable Life Insurance Policies and agreed to a settlement of $50,000; before that, in May 2004, a customer alleged that broker Daniel Edward Brunette used misleading sales materials and misrepresented a variable insurance policy. The settlement amount for this case was $20,588.24.
Similarly, in 2003, his clients alleged the same misleading use of materials and misrepresentations in a case filed in Marion County Superior Court in Indiana. In 2009, this dispute ended in a settlement of $150,000.
Another private arbitration filed by Brunette’s customers in 2002 finalized in a settlement of $14,000, his brokercheck report reveals.
In September 2003, a customer alleged misrepresentations and the fact that initials on certain application forms for insurance was not his, This dispute concluded in a $18,112.31 settlement a few months later.
Along the same lines, in March 2003, a customer alleged misrepresentations and unsuitability in a case filed in Marion County Superior Court, IN. The case was settled in August 2004 for $5,656.24. Just a few months prior to this, in January 2003, a customer alleged misrepresentations and settled for $41,837.44.
In another case, also filed in Marion County Superior Court in May 2002, Brunette’s customers agreed to a $260,000 settlement in relation to their complaint involving variable annuities. Finally, in July 2000, a customer alleged that Brunette used unapproved, misleading sales material and engaged in misrepresentations. This customer agreed to a $30,000 settlement amount.
Brunette’s Brokercheck Shows He Was Subject to Six Regulatory Actions
In October 2004, the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), a self-regulatory organization of the securities industry and a predecessor of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), sanctioned Daniel Edward Brunette after it became aware that four of Brunette’s clients alleged that the representative failed to clearly describe the product as Variable Annuity Insurance policy.
Brunette agreed to being censured, to a $10,000 fine, and a suspension in all capacities for five days, according to his Brokerhceck. This regulatory action was followed by five sanctions related to failure to report the NASD administrative action.
Finally, it is important to note that, as of the date of this article, there has not been a finding of liability as to the complaints or allegations mentioned in this article, unless otherwise indicated. Any reader should also read the original sources hyperlinked in this blog for accuracy, including any BrokerCheck report and/or record of any disciplinary or regulatory action. Those sources are incorporated by reference into the text of this blog, and are the governing materials in case of any inconsistencies or typos in this blog.
Concerned about investments with
Investor Attorneys Investigating
The investor attorneys of the Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm often advise and represent investors who are victims of broker misconduct and they are currently investigating allegations of unsuitability, fraud and inadequate due diligence brought by customers of Daniel Edward Brunette.
Investors should note that the firm takes most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advances the case costs, and only gets paid for their fees and costs out of money recovered for clients. Attorney Alan Rosca, a securities lawyer and adjunct professor of securities regulation, has represented thousands of victimized investors across the country and around the world in cases ranging from arbitrations to class actions.
Investors who believe they lost money as a result of conducts as those disclosed on First Allied Securities broker Daniel Brunette’s Brokercheck alleging unsuitability, fraud and inadequate due diligence, may contact attorney Alan Rosca for a free, no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 888-998-0530, via email at arosca@rscounsel.law, or through the contact form on this webpage
