Raquel Pacheco (also known as Raquel Badea), a registered broker and investment adviser based in Westlake, Ohio is the subject of a customer dispute disclosure filed on the allegations of unsuitability of investment recommendations and failure to follow instructions according to an investigation by lawyer Alan Rosca.
Securities lawyer Alan Rosca, of Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm is investigating conduct related to the customer dispute disclosure involving broker Raquel Pacheco on the allegations of unsuitability of investment recommendations and failure to follow instructions.
Pacheco is currently in the employment of Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC., a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) member firm since February 2018. Prior to this, he was in the employment of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, a Lake Forest California based firm between June 2007 and February 2018.
Concerned about investments with
Raquel Pacheco Is the Subject of a Customer Dispute Disclosure
Publicly available information reviewed by the securities lawyer shows that the broker and investment adviser is the subject of a customer dispute dsiclosure according to the reports on her FINRA Brokercheck page. According to the brokercheck report, the customer dispute was initiated in May 2020.
In this dispute, the client is alleging that the investment recommendation was unsuitable and failure to follow instructions. As a result of this, the client is seeking to recover $100,109 in damages from the dispute.
Unsuitable Investment Recommendation and Failure to Follow Instructions
Generally speaking, brokers and investment advisers are expected to make investment recommendations which are suitable and meet the needs of their clients and investors. Clients of brokers and broker-dealers have specific needs which the brokers are expected to meet. In ensuring that the investments recommendations made to the clients are suitable, there are certain criteria the broker or brokerage firm may consider. One of such criteria could be the ascertainment of the general suitability of the investments. This could be ascertained through a proper due diligence into the proposed investment recommendation. Investments and securities that turn out to be frauds or pose a high risk of loss could be deemed generally unsuitable.
Another step is for the broker to consider the specific appropriateness of that investment to his specific clients. Not all classes of investments and securities are suitable to all classes of investors. Thus, a broker is expected to determine if the proposed investment suits the class of investor requiring such. For instance, the broker can be faced with a situation of determining whether a high risk illiquid investment is suitable for his elderly client. Another factor the broker may consider is the appropriate quantity of the investment to be deemed suitable. This could help to avoid the over concentration or under concentration of the portfolio with a particular security or investment.
Unsuitable investment recommendations could also arise from the failure of the broker to follow his client’s instructions or execute the transactions as instructed. Generally, brokers and investment advisers have a duty to follow the client’s instructions for instance, as it relates to the type of securities to invest in, the entry point or selling points of their investments, the concentration of their portfolio and many more.
It is the duty of the broker to comply with these instructions and failure to do so may amount to a breach of their fiduciary duty. Where the broker fails to follow the instructions, there is a possibility that the investments recommended may be unsuitable. The impact of this is that the broker may be liable to the investors for any loss occasioned by the failure to follow the client’s instructions. It should be noted that this does not in any way constitute legal advice and a legal practitioner should be consulted for proper and individualized legal advice.
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
Securities Lawyer Investigating
The Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm represents investors who lose money as a result of investment-related fraud or misconduct and is currently investigating conduct related to Raquel Pacheco’s customer dispute disclosure alleging unsuitability of investment recommendations and failure to follow instructions.
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 unsuitability of investment recommendations and failure to follow instructions, 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.
