- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Metairie Financial Firm Having Suitability Issues
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:23 pm to Janky
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:23 pm to Janky
yep. They are supposed to require additional documentation that the client has assets because there is serious concentration risk. Typically there is another form that they have to sign saying they understand the implications of the alternative investment, liquidity issues, and possible tax consequences. It is a form pretty much industry standard.
Anyone that wants information on regulations can go to the FINRA website. Also you can go to brokercheck to see complaints that were filed against an FA.
FINRA brokercheck
Always read the forms you are signing.
Anyone that wants information on regulations can go to the FINRA website. Also you can go to brokercheck to see complaints that were filed against an FA.
FINRA brokercheck
Always read the forms you are signing.
1
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:25 pm to Janky
quote:
What do you mean kickbacks?
Disguised as "commissions" from the other shysters running these REITs.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:39 pm to MMauler
quote:
I'm sorry, but these two look like complete f*cking scam artists. I would bet that the end result of this investigation will be that these two shysters we're getting huge kickbacks to put these retirees into these unstable REITs all the while insinuating to these poor saps that they were invested in AAA bonds.
Logical fallacy much? They look like two old dudes. That's it. They aren't called kickbacks, they're called commissions, and they're perfectly legal and it's a REIT, which no one who ever even glanced at a brochure would have ever confused for a bond.
Take a deep breath. Now, how much would you bet that the end result of this doesn't involve the words "kickback" or the bond rating "AAA"? Asking for a friend...
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:43 pm to UpstairsComputer
quote:
UpstairsComputer
Thanks for your contribution, Mr. Briseno.
We'll see what happens when it all unfolds.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:43 pm to yatesdog38
Yep, those are two pretty clean records too. Something tells me they have the correct forms signed.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:46 pm to MMauler
But no bet, right? Gotcha. I could've sworn when you were first angry at the brokers, you were willing to bet. Cool. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
And just for the record, I am way sexier than Mr. Briseno.
And just for the record, I am way sexier than Mr. Briseno.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:50 pm to UpstairsComputer
quote:
Yep, those are two pretty clean records too.
From THIS article -
quote:
According to FINRA's BrokerCheck website for Public Disclosures, Frank Briseno III has been the subject of 3 disclosures. Since commencing our investigation, the 2 Civil Judgments/Liens have been cleared up and removed from his report.
2017: Judgment/Lien - Civil Judgment/Lien of $47,373.29
2017: Judgment/Lien - Civil Judgment/Lien of $41,371.85
Something tells me, these two scumbags are going down.
Do you care to give us any disclosure - like who you are or how you know these two pieces of complete f*cking FILTH?
Let me guess - your business is involved in the same unethical and slimebag practices as these two scumbags.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 4:54 pm
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:54 pm to MMauler
You sure are salty.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:56 pm to MMauler
I appreciate your sleuthing, it's clear to me I'm not as invested in this as you are. I just glanced at BrokerCheck real quick. Peculiar they don't mention if those judgments had to do with a divorce or something like that though... So two were removed and one was denied. Solid case. I'm just messing with you cause you're clearly upset for some reason. You were one step away from calling these guys wops a couple of minutes ago.
I would still take your stupid bet though.
I would still take your stupid bet though.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 4:59 pm to MMauler
LMAO you really edited your post to ask me who I was on a public forum and how I know these guys? 
Show me on the doll where the financial guy touched you...
Show me on the doll where the financial guy touched you...
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:08 pm to UpstairsComputer
Just admit that you're a scumbag broker who preys on the elderly.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 5:09 pm
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:18 pm to MMauler
quote:
Just admit that you're a scumbag broker who preys on the elderly.
Wow.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:31 pm to MMauler
That escalated quickly.
I'm not willing to throw these advisors under the bus yet, but they have a lot of explaining to do. If 30 people are saying they didn't understand this investment, and it didn't fit with their suitability analysis, then something is very wrong.
I made the OP more as a warning to people to always know what they are investing in, even if someone else is handling your investments. I don't expect these clients to know 100 percent of the in and out of this... but they should have at least known that this investment isn't a bond.
I'm not willing to throw these advisors under the bus yet, but they have a lot of explaining to do. If 30 people are saying they didn't understand this investment, and it didn't fit with their suitability analysis, then something is very wrong.
I made the OP more as a warning to people to always know what they are investing in, even if someone else is handling your investments. I don't expect these clients to know 100 percent of the in and out of this... but they should have at least known that this investment isn't a bond.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:34 pm to MMauler
Oy vey, this is the best I can do for you, a quick recap of the conversation:
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:34 pm to LSUFanHouston
I am sure they were sold on the big dividend.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:41 pm to LSUFanHouston
How can anyone defend a broker who puts retirees into untraded REITs, tells them not to put anything in writing, and never gets back to them?
Seriously, how much in KICKBACKS from these untraded REITs would be too much for other brokers to say, "Yeah, that was pretty f*cking slimy"?
And do you think for a second that these two filthy scumbags disclosed these KICKBACKS to these retirees?
The good news is that they'll be out of business in no time. And, thanks to the new FINRA laws, similarly situated SCUMBAG brokers, like UpstairsComputer, who are willing to defend these two shysters, will also be out of business very soon
Seriously, how much in KICKBACKS from these untraded REITs would be too much for other brokers to say, "Yeah, that was pretty f*cking slimy"?
And do you think for a second that these two filthy scumbags disclosed these KICKBACKS to these retirees?
The good news is that they'll be out of business in no time. And, thanks to the new FINRA laws, similarly situated SCUMBAG brokers, like UpstairsComputer, who are willing to defend these two shysters, will also be out of business very soon
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:45 pm to MMauler
You mad?
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:48 pm to MMauler
quote:
How can anyone defend a broker who puts retirees into untraded REITs, tells them not to put anything in writing, and never gets back to them?
Seriously, how much in KICKBACKS from these untraded REITs would be too much for other brokers to say, "Yeah, that was pretty f*cking slimy"?
And do you think for a second that these two filthy scumbags disclosed these KICKBACKS to these retirees?
Like I said, they have a lot of explaining to do. This certainly looks very bad for these individuals.
Your ranting is a little heavy, though, at this time. We usually try to keep a bit higher decorum over here on the MT. Maybe your anger is justified, we just don't know it yet.
But no doubt... this doesn't look good. One or two unsatisfied clients can be a misunderstanding. 30 is a big issue.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 5:58 pm to MMauler
Did you even read my other comments prior to your douchebaggery? YOU are the one who with no evidence started with the AD HOMINEM ATTACKS. I defended NO ONE. You started using ALL CAPS to emphasize your points.
You’re assuming that just because they’re shitty advisors they had a malicious intent. At some point, it’s your job as a client to make a decision. If they really did defraud and lie to 30 THIRTY! Different client groups certainly it will come out, but nothing you’ve presented as evidence means shite.
YOU SIR are a very angry troll.
You’re assuming that just because they’re shitty advisors they had a malicious intent. At some point, it’s your job as a client to make a decision. If they really did defraud and lie to 30 THIRTY! Different client groups certainly it will come out, but nothing you’ve presented as evidence means shite.
YOU SIR are a very angry troll.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 6:04 pm to UpstairsComputer
quote:
YOU SIR are a very angry troll.
Coming from a slimy broker who preys on the elderly for "commissions" (wink, wink).............
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News