Dennis Keith Karasik – and the firm that employs him or her – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
If you are like most people, before you go out to dinner at a new restaurant, you probably take a quick look at the reviews. This makes sense; you are going to pay for an expensive dinner, and you need to be sure that you are getting a good value.
Yet, when choosing a financial advisor, many people fail to conduct this same level of due diligence. Before turning over access to your money, you need to be sure that you have found a financial advisor that you can trust. Here, our audit report, including details of allegations, complaints, and sanctions will help you decide whether or not to invest with Dennis Keith Karasik.
The stock market is a device for transferring money from the impatient to the patient… Warren Buffet
BrokerComplaints.com is currently investigating allegations related to Dennis Keith Karasik. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.
About Dennis Karasik
Dennis Keith Karasik is an Investment Adviser. Dennis Keith Karasik’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 1227463 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1227463.
Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Dennis Keith Karasik.
Dennis Keith Karasik has previously been reprimanded and has disclosures and/or client dispute(s) listed at FINRA BrokerCheck.
Accusations and Disclosures
You can find below, a quick snapshot of Dennis Keith Karasik’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.
DISCLOSURE 1 –
- Event Date: 10/7/2016
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: Violations of Federal, Maryland, and Pennsylvania Securities Laws, Violation of Maryland Consumer Protection Act, Violation of Pennsylvania Consumer Protection Act, Breach of Contract, Common Law Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Negligence.
- Damage Amount Requested: $185,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $46,242.02
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 2 –
- Event Date: 11/6/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: Violations of Federal, Maryland, and Pennsylvania Securities Laws, Violation of Maryland Consumer Protection Act, Violation of Pennsylvania Consumer Protection Act, Breach of Contract, Common Law Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Negligence.
- Damage Amount Requested: $215,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $49,903.63
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 3 –
- Event Date: 8/4/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL & MARYLAND SECURITIES LAW, VIOLATION OF MARYLAND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, BREACH OF CONTRACT, COMMON LAW FRAUD, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, NEGLIGENCE AND GROSS NEGLIGENCE.
- Damage Amount Requested: $314,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $114,392.19
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 4 –
- Event Date: 8/4/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL & MARYLAND SECURITIES LAW, VIOLATION OF MARYLAND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, BREACH OF CONTRACT, COMMON LAW FRAUD, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, NEGLIGENCE AND GROSS NEGLIGENCE.
- Damage Amount Requested: $359,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $126,624.05
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 5 –
- Event Date: 8/3/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: CLAIMANTS ALLEGE THAT REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE MADE MISREPRESENTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO INVEST IN OIL AND GAS. DATES OF ACTIVITY ARE JAN 2012 THROUGH FEBRUARY 2013.
- Damage Amount Requested: $130,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $43,121.00
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 6 –
- Event Date: 7/27/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Settled
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL & MARYLAND SECURITIES LAW, VIOLATION OF MARYLAND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, BREACH OF CONTRACT, COMMON LAW FRAUD, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, AND NEGLIGENCE.
- Damage Amount Requested: $370,000.00
- Settlement Amount: $100,286.54
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 7 –
- Event Date: 7/10/2015
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Denied
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL & MARYLAND SECURITIES LAW, VIOLATION OF MARYLAND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, BREACH OF CONTRACT, COMMON LAW FRAUD, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, AND NEGLIGENCE.
- Damage Amount Requested: $237,331.47
- Damages Granted: $107,551.51
- Arbitration Docket Number:
DISCLOSURE 8 –
- Event Date: 1/23/2015
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC ADMIN RELEASES 33-9708; 34-74120; IA RELEASE 40-4005; / JANUARY 23, 2015: THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAT CEASE-AND-DESIST PROCEEDINGS BE, AND HEREBY ARE, INSTITUTED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT ALONG WITH OTHER RESPONDENTS. AFTER AN INVESTIGATION, THE DIVISION OF ENFORCEMENT ALLEGES THAT: BETWEEN 2006 AND 2012, A CORPORATION AND ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICERS RAISED AT LEAST $17.4 MILLION FROM APPROXIMATELY 440 INVESTORS NATIONWIDE THROUGH A SERIES OF FRAUDULENT, UNREGISTERED OFFERINGS OF STOCK AND BONDS. THE CORPORATION REPRESENTED THAT IT WAS PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BUYING AND SELLING FRACTIONAL INTERESTS IN OIL AND GAS PRODUCING PROPERTIES AND ALSO ENGAGED IN COMMODITIES TRADING IN THE FUTURES MARKET. THE CORPORATION USED A PORTION OF THE INVESTOR FUNDS TO BUY FRACTIONAL INTERESTS IN OIL AND GAS WELLS, CATTLE, AND A HYDROGEN DEVICE THAT PURPORTED TO INCREASE GAS MILEAGE ON VEHICLES, TRADE COMMODITIES CONTRACTS, AND INVEST IN REAL ESTATE. THE CORPORATION AND ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICERS MADE MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATIONS AND OMISSIONS ABOUT THE CORPORATION’S FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND USE OF INDUSTRY EXPERTS AND TECHNOLOGIES IN THE CORPORATION’S OFFERING MATERIAL AND CORRESPONDENCE TO INVESTORS. ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICERS ALSO TOUTED THEIR AFFILIATION WITH A CHARITY ORGANIZATION IN THE CORPORATION’S OFFERING MATERIALS BUT THAT CHARITY NEVER HAD ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. STARTING IN 2009, THE CORPORATION ALSO HIRED UNREGISTERED SALES AGENTS TO SELL ITS BONDS PAYING THEM COMMISSIONS OF 5 PERCENT OR 10 PERCENT OF THE INVESTOR PROCEEDS. THE CORPORATION AND A PRINCIPAL EMPLOYED THE UNREGISTERED SALES AGENTS TO RAISE MONEY FOR THE CORPORATION EVEN AFTER RECEIVING AN EMAIL AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CORPORATION’S OUTSIDE COUNSEL DETAILING THE LIMITS ON THE CORPORATION’S USE OF UNREGISTERED SALES AGENTS. THE CORPORATION’S TOP GROSSING INDEPENDENT SALES AGENTS INCLUDED KARASIK, AND HIS LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP. COLLECTIVELY, THEY EARNED APPROXIMATELY $985,000 IN TRANSACTION-BASED COMPENSATION IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR SALES ACTIVITIES. AS A RESULT OF THE CONDUCT, KARASIK WILLFULLY VIOLATED SECTION 15(A) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.
- Resolution: Order
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar (Permanent)
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: see comment
- Start Date: 7/28/2015 Sanctions: Cease and Desist Sanctions: Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)
- Sanction Details :: Amount: $3,500.00 Sanctions: Disgorgement
- Sanction Details :: Amount: $11,300.00
- Sanctions: disgorgement plus prejudgment interest
DISCLOSURE 9 –
- Event Date: 7/8/2014
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 2012034750401
- DocketNumberAAO: 2012034750401
- Initiated By: FINRA
- Allegations: WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FINDINGS, KARASIK CONSENTED TO THE SANCTION AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS THAT HE PARTICIPATED IN PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WITH THE SALES OF A FLORIDA-BASED ENERGY COMPANY’S BONDS WITHOUT PROVIDING PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE MEMBER FIRMS WITH WHICH HE WAS REGISTERED WHEN HE SOLD THOSE BONDS. THE FINDINGS STATED THAT KARASIK FALSELY ANSWERED O\ ON ANNUAL BUSINESS QUESTIONNAIRES TO THE QUESTION ASKING WHETHER HE HAD ENGAGED IN PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT RECEIVING PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL. KARASIK ALSO FAILED TO PROVIDE ACCURATE INFORMATION TO A FIRM REGARDING AN INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL SERVICES BUSINESS, WHERE HE SERVED AS A PARTNER, AND CONCEALED ITS INVESTMENT-RELATED NATURE. KARASIK AND HIS PARTNER IN THE BUSINESS PARTICIPATED IN THE SALE OF MORE THAN $3.2 MILLION OF THE COMPANY’S BONDS TO INVESTORS, SOME OF WHOM WERE ALSO HIS BROKERAGE CUSTOMERS. KARASIK WAS COMPENSATED FOR HIS ROLE IN THESE SALES THROUGH THE PAYMENT OF A FINDER’S FEE, WHICH WAS PAID TO THE BUSINESS. KARASIK PERSONALLY WITHDREW MOST OF THE BOND COMPANY’S PROCEEDS DEPOSITED INTO HIS OUTSIDE BUSINESS BANK ACCOUNT – MORE THAN $115,000 – BY WRITING CHECKS TO HIMSELF, OFTEN A DAY OR TWO AFTER THE DEPOSIT BY THE COMPANY. THE FINDINGS ALSO STATED THAT KARASIK PROVIDED FALSE INFORMATION TO HIS FIRM FOR FORM U4 AMENDMENT, CONCERNING CUSTOMERS’ ALLEGATION THAT HE MADE UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPANY’S BOND AND ENGAGED IN PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS. KARASIK PROVIDED FALSE INFORMATION TO FINRA IN REQUEST FOR A SIGNED STATEMENT FROM HIM ADDRESSING ALLEGATIONS BY INDIVIDUALS OF UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS, MISREPRESENTATIONS, AND NEGLIGENCE IN THE SALE OF THE BONDS. IN FACT, KARASIK HAD RECOMMENDED THE PURCHASE OF THE BONDS, TO THE CUSTOMERS AND TO THE INDIVIDUALS, AND HAD BEEN PAID FINDER’S FEES IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRANSACTIONS. KARASIK ALSO PROVIDED FALSE TESTIMONY TO FINRA ABOUT HIS ROLE IN THE SALES OF THE COMPANY’S BONDS AND HIS RECEIPT OF COMPENSATION FROM THE COMPANY.
- Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar (Permanent)
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: All Capacities
- Start Date: 7/8/2014
DISCLOSURE 10 –
- Event Date: 6/30/2014
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Denied
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: CUSTOMER ALLEGES FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THE SALE OF DIVERSIFIED ENERGY GROUP BONDS. DATE OF ACTIVITY – 1/1/2012-2/28/2013.
- Damage Amount Requested: $6,902.54
- Arbitration Docket Number:
According to a study prepared for the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, 80 percent of American investors report that they have been solicited to participate in a fraud scheme, while 11 percent of American investors report that they personally lost money as a result of fraud.
FINRA notes that the rate of investment fraud is most likely much higher than it is reported. This is because many victims of financial advisor scams are too ashamed to come forward. Further, the study also found that a significant number of investors do not know how to spot common red flags of investment fraud. The least you should do is share your experience with other potential victims of investment scams.
Previous Associations
Under federal securities law and securities industry regulations, registered investment firms have a legal duty to supervise their financial advisors. Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 makes a securities firm liable for the conduct of representatives.
- H. BECK, INC. (CRD#: 1763) :: 1/4/2012 – 2/27/2013 :: PARKTON, MD
- MULTI-FINANCIAL SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 10299) :: 6/2/2006 – 12/31/2011 :: PARKTON, MD
- NEW ENGLAND SECURITIES (CRD#: 615) :: 10/7/2003 – 5/30/2006 :: HUNT VALLEY, MD
- EQUITY SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 265) :: 9/10/1996 – 9/19/2003 :: MONTPELIER, VT
- MULTI-FINANCIAL SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 10299) :: 9/23/1992 – 12/31/1995 :: GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO
- VIP FINANCIAL COMPANIES, INC. (CRD#: 18892) :: 8/29/1990 – 10/9/1992
- MML INVESTORS SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 10409) :: 1/29/1987 – 7/25/1990 :: SPRINGFIELD, MA
- NEL EQUITY SERVICES CORPORATION (CRD#: 615) :: 2/27/1984 – 10/25/1985
The duty to supervise securities representatives is a strong legal requirement. Registered investment firms must take many different steps to ensure that they are protecting their customers from irresponsible and criminal financial advisors.
Legit or Not?
Unfortunately, stockbroker fraud is more common than many investors would like to think. And yes, stockbrokers (including Dennis Keith Karasik, but not limited to) can (and do) steal money from their clients. While it’s rare that a broker will literally steal his client’s money (though that does happen), typically the “theft” of investment funds comes in the form of other fraudulent violations of securities law and FINRA rules which leads to significant investment losses.
Sometimes investment losses occur because advisors, stockbrokers, and even brokerage firms, commit fraud. Massimo Vignelli
Investors generally understand that there are risks associated with buying and selling securities. The market can go up, and the market can go down. No matter how skilled of an investor you are, there are always risks. With that being said, sometimes investment losses cannot be blamed on simple back luck.
There are 10 major types of complaints we receive against Investment Brokers –
- Outright Theft (Conversion of Funds)
- Unauthorized Trading
- Misrepresentation or Omission of Material Facts
- Excessive Trading (Churning)
- Lack of Diversification
- Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
- Failure to Disclose a Personal Conflict of Interest
- Front Running of Transactions
- Breakpoint Sale Violations
- Negligent Portfolio Management
Do your due diligence before investing. Public records are available for everybody to review and decide on the safest bet.
How to Protect Yourself
We, as citizens, place a great deal of trust in the financial advisors who are tasked with helping us achieve and maintain financial security. Most of the time financial advisors and stockbrokers are honest folks who work diligently in their client’s best interests. However, on occasion financial advisors and the brokerage firms who employ them mess up and cause serious financial harm to their clients. Sometimes these losses are caused by simple negligence. Other times fraud or other serious misconduct is to blame.
Here are 5 signs that your broker needs to be reported –
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, certain investment professionals, known as registered investment advisors (RIAs), owe fiduciary obligations to their customers. Your investment broker must always look out for your best interests. If you lost money because of your broker’s breach of fiduciary duty, you may be entitled to compensation for the full value of your damages.
- Unsuitable Investments: Many financial advisors are not fiduciaries. Instead, they are held to the suitability standard. These stockbrokers and financial advisors can only sell and recommend financial products that are appropriate for a customer’s unique investment profile. If you lost money in unsuitable investments, you should consider reporting them.
- Material Misrepresentations or Omissions: Brokers have a duty to make fair and honest representations to their clients. If they fail to do so, and an investor loses money due to a misrepresentation or a material omission, the broker may be liable for the investor’s losses.
- Lack of Diversification: Brokers must also act with the appropriate level of professional skill. Pushing a customer into over-concentrated investments is highly risky. Brokers can be held liable for losses sustained because of an investor’s inappropriate lack of diversification.
- Excessive Trading (Churning): Stockbrokers and financial advisors must have a well-grounded, reasonable basis to execute all trades. Unfortunately, there are cases in which brokers will frequently trade on a customer’s account, simply to increase their own fees. This unlawful practice is known as churning.
- Unauthorized Trading: Brokers must have the proper legal authority to make transactions on behalf of a client. If you lost money because your broker made trades that you never approved of, you may have been the victim of unauthorized trading. You should consult with an experienced attorney.
Report Dennis Karasik
In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.
Dennis Keith Karasik – and the firm that employs this broker – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). FINRA provides an online form to allow investors to file a formal complaint against their financial advisor, stockbroker, or brokerage firm.
Click here to go to FINRA’s Online Complaint Form →
This form will ask you for specific information related to your complaint. Be prepared by gathering the following:
- Name and symbol for the investment product in question.
- The CRD number (1227463) for the broker – Dennis Keith Karasik
- Your complete contact information.
Remember, it is advised to report your broker to FINRA, only after you have exhausted all of your other remedies and carefully prepared a compelling complaint. Once you file a complaint against your broker at FINRA, your case will be bound by FINRA’s rules and the arbitration panel’s eventual decision. The time clock will start, and your complaint will be served on your broker or broker-dealer.