Wisconsin Broker Edward Matthes Barred by SEC and FINRA

Ed Matthes Barred by Securities and Exchange Commission

Edward Earl Matthes, also known as Ed Matthews, a former broker and investment representative, has been barred for allegedly lying to his customers in order to convince them to invest, according to a complaint filed by Securities and Exchange Commission. The complaint states that over the course of six years, the Wisconsin based broker Ed Matthes “defrauded 26 of his mostly elderly retail brokerage customers and investment advisory clients out of approximately $2.4 million”.

Ed Matthes was also barred by the State of Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions Division of Securities for allegedly creating imaginary investments and misappropriating his insurance client’s funds to an amount over $1 million and has allegedly agreed to settle the fraud charges and pay the penalties and damages according to an investigation by investor rights attorney, Alan Rosca.

Investor rights attorney Alan Rosca, of the Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm, is investigating the alleged settlement of Ed Matthes’ fraud charges and payments. Edward Matthes who was at the time of the initiation of the allegations and investigations, in the employment of Mutual of Omaha Investment Services has allegedly agreed to settle the fraud charges brought against him and pay the corresponding damages and penalties.

Edward Matthes Barred by the Wisconsin Securities Regulator

According to his FINRA Brokercheck Report, Ed Matthes was issued a permanent cease and desist order by the Wisconsin Security regulator, which barred him permanently in all capacities as an investment representative including all registrations. In connection to this particular sanction, Ed Matthes has also been involved in as much as ten customer disputes of various matters, which have been allegedly settled accordingly.

In 2019, it was alleged that the representative misappropriated funds by diverting the client’s assets into his own personal account. This allegation was supported by the documentation provided by the client including a Check deposited into the representative’s bank account and a fictitious account statement and it was settled to the tune of $87,584.95.

A similar dispute was settled to the amount of $314,823.87 in 2019. As of the date of this blog, 9 out of the 10 customer disputes levelled against Edward Matthes have been settled.

As at the time of writing this report, there is a pending customer dispute initiated in 2019, where the client alleges that Edward Matthes as representative misappropriated funds by diverting assets into his own bank account. The client is seeking damages to the sum of $512,950.53 according to the FINRA Brockercheck report.

Edward Matthes by FINRA

Prior to his bar by the Wisconsin State regulator, Edward Matthes was also barred by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). This was based on the allegations that Matthes refused to provide documents and information requested by FINRA in respect of an investigation initiated against him by FINRA.

Matthes allegedly signed the Acceptance Waiver and Consent Order without admitting or denying the finding but consented to the sanction which led to his bar. It must also be noted that, at the time of compiling this report, an investigation initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on the alleged misappropriation of funds by Edward Matthes is currently ongoing and yet to be concluded according to FINRA

Edward Matthes Sanctioned by the Missouri Securities Division

In 2006, while serving as a registered Investment representative in Missouri and in the employment of Thrivent Investment Management, Edward Matthes was sanctioned by the Missouri Securities Division for the alleged unsuitable sale of a variable annuity to a Missouri resident and an alleged investment of 85-90% liquidity of the same client into a variable annuity. The Missouri Securities Division alleged that Matthes advised a 53-year-old woman to put 85-90% of her liquid assets into a variable annuity and such is a conduct which violates Missouri securities laws and constitutes a ground for discipline.

Edward Matthes settled this allegation by consenting to the Acceptance, Waiver and Consent Order issued by the securities division. He was issued monetary sanctions other than fines to the tune of $7, 308.00. prior to this, in 2005, Matthes also settled a customer dispute brought against him, he was alleged by the customer to not have made a full disclosure as a registered representative.

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.

Securities Lawyer Investigating

The Rosca Scarlato LLC law firm represents investors who lose money as a result of investment-related fraud or misconduct and are currently investigating Edward Matthes alleged settlement of fraud charges and penalties. The firm takes most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance 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, and 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 Edward Matthes alleged fraud and misappropriation charges 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.

DISCLAIMER

In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow matters about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent updates regarding various developments that may occur in such matters. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such matters and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such matters. Also, the Brokercheck report linked to some of our blogs is the up-to-date version as of the date of accessing by the reader. The information in our blogs is current as of the date of the drafting of the blog, and given that sometimes certain past complaints may no longer be listed in newer Brokercheck reports, some of the events referenced in some of our blogs may later on be removed from newer Brokercheck reports. Visitors may check the most recent version of each brokercheck report at www.finra.org, and may contact FINRA for the earlier version of the Brokercheck report upon which various blogs may be based.

If you believe you lost money as a result of investment-related fraud or misconduct, please contact our law firm for a free, no-obligation evaluation of your recovery options.

How to contact us?

We can also do a Zoom call to discuss your matter.