Marco Guy Fiore – 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 Marco Guy Fiore.
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 Marco Guy Fiore. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.
About Marco Fiore
Marco Guy Fiore is an Investment Adviser. Marco Guy Fiore’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 2225944 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/2225944.
Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Marco Guy Fiore.
Marco Guy Fiore 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 Marco Guy Fiore’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.
DISCLOSURE 1 –
- Event Date: 12/11/2003
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC Admin Release 34-48905, December 11, 2003: The SEC deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against Marco G. Fiore, Jr. In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement which the Commission has determined to accept. Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except as to the Commission’s jurisdiction over him and the subject matter of these proceedings, and the findings contained herein, which are admitted, Respondent consents to the entry of this Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions. On the basis of this Order and Respondent’s Offer, the Commission finds that on November 20, 2003, a final judgment by consent was entered against Fiore, permanently enjoining him from future violations of Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Rules 101 and 102 of Regulation M, in the civil action case number 00 Civ. 9422, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On December 28, 2001, Fiore pled guilty to one count of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, wire fraud, and commercial bribery, in violation of Title 15 United States Code, Sections 77q(a) and 77(x) and Title 18 United States Code, Section 371 before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in criminal case number 00 Cr 1267. On June 10, 2002, a judgment in the criminal case was entered against Fiore. He was sentenced to a prison term of 51 months followed by three years of supervised release and ordered to make restitution, jointly and severally, in the amount of $10,773,461.
- Resolution: Order
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar (Permanent)
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: see comment
- Duration: Indefinite
- Start Date: 12/11/2003
DISCLOSURE 2 –
- Event Date: 12/12/2000
- Disclosure Type: Civil
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 16823, DATED 12/12/2000: THE SEC ANNOUNCED THAT IT FILED A COMPLAINT IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CHARGING DEFENDANT, REPRESENTATIVE OF A BROKER-DEALER FIRM (\FIRM\), WITH PERPETRATING A FRAUD ON HIS CUSTOMERS. THE DEFENDANT EMPLOYED FRAUDULENT SALES PRACTICES TO INDUCE FIRM CUSTOMERS TO INVEST IN THE 1996 INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING (\IPO\) OF A COMPANY. THE DEFENDANT ARTIFICIALLY INFLATED THE PRICE OF, AND DEMAND FOR, STOCKS AND WARRANTS IN AFTERMARKET TRADING SO THAT HE COULD SELL HIS OWN UNDISCLOSED HOLDINGS OF SECURITIES AT INFLATED PRICES. THE SEC ALLEGES THAT: BETWEEN 01/1996 AND 03/1996, FIRM’S REPRESENTATIVES, AT THE DIRECTION OF DEFENDANT: MADE BASELESS AND INFLATED PROJECTIONS ABOUT THE PRICE THAT STOCKS WOULD COMMAND IN THE AFTERMARKET; BASELESSLY PROMISED CUSTOMERS THAT FIRM WOULD PURCHASE THEIR SHARES AFTER THE IPO, IF THE PRICE OF THOSE SHARES DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE; OFFERED AND SOLD SECURITIES TO CUSTOMERS PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF IPO; SOLICITED CUSTOMER PURCHASES OF SECURITIES IN THE AFTERMARKET PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF IPO – ALMOST ALWAYS REQUIRING CUSTOMERS WHO WANTED IPO SECURITIES TO AGREE TO BUY AN EQUAL NUMBER OF AFTERMARKET SECURITIES AT A HIGHER PRICE; EXECUTED UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASES OF SECURITIES IN CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS; REFUSED OR OTHERWISE FAILED TO EXECUTE CUSTOMER ORDERS TO SELL SECURITIES DURING AFTERMARKET TRADING; AND EXECUTED CUSTOMER SELL ORDERS FOR SECURITIES IN THE AFTERMARKET ONLY IF THE SALE COULD BE PAIRED WITH A PURCHASE OF SECURITIES BY ANOTHER CUSTOMER. THE DEFENDANT DIRECTED AND APPROVED OF THE SCHEME, WHICH RESULTED IN SUBSTANTIAL INFLATION IN THE VALUE OF STOCKS AND WARRANTS, AND WHICH YIELDED AT LEAST $720,000 IN AGGREGATE ILLEGAL PROFITS FOR THE DEFENDANT. THE DEFENDANT, DIRECTLY AND AS CONTROLLING PERSON, VIOLATED SECS. 5 & 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 AND SEC. 10(B) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT RULES 10B-5 & 10B-6.
- Resolution: Judgment Rendered
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Cease and Desist/Injunction
- Sanction Details: SEC LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 18520, DATED DECEMBER 23, 2003: THE SEC ANNOUNCED TODAY THAT THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ENTERED A FINAL JUDGMENT OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION BY CONSENT ON NOVEMBER 20, 2003 AGAINST DEFENDANT IN AN ACTION BROUGHT BY THE SEC FOR DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT SALES PRACTICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE 1996 INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING OF THE SECURITIES. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE SEC’S COMPLAINT, DEFENDANT CONSENTED TO THE ENTRY OF THE COURT’S FINAL JUDGMENT THAT PERMANENTLY ENJOIN HIM FROM FURTHER VIOLATIONS OF SECTIONS 5 AND 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, 15 U.S.C. SECTIONS 77E AND Q(A), SECTION 10(B) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT, 15 U.S.C. SECTION 78J(B), RULE 10B-5, 17 C.F.R. SECTION 240.10B-5, AND RULES 101 AND 102 OF REGULATION M PROMULGATED THEREUNDER, 17 C.F.R. SECTIONS 242.101 AND 242.102.
DISCLOSURE 3 –
- Event Date: 12/12/2000
- Disclosure Type: Criminal
- Disclosure Resolution: Final Disposition
- Disclosure Detail :: Criminal Charges :: Charges: CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES (CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SECURITIES FRAUD, WIRE FRAUD, COMMERCIAL BRIBERY)
- Disposition: Pled guilty Charges: SECURITIES VIOLATIONS (SECURITIES FRAUD)
- Disposition: Pled guilty Charges: STATEMENTS OR ENTRIES GENERALLY (FALSE STATEMENTS)
- Disposition: Dismissed Charges: SECURITIES VIOLATIONS (SECURITIES FRAUD)
- Disposition: Dismissed
DISCLOSURE 4 –
- Event Date: 8/8/1997
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC.
- Resolution: Decision
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
- Broker Comment: NOT PROVIDED
DISCLOSURE 5 –
- Event Date: 5/1/1997
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Award / Judgment
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: FAILURE TO EXECUTE A TRADE
- Damages Granted: $8,000.00
- Arbitration Claim File Detail: 96-04111
- Arbitration Docket Number:
- Broker Comment: AN AWARD $2794.00 THAT HE SETTLED Not Provided
DISCLOSURE 6 –
- Event Date: 11/27/1996
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Disclosure Resolution: Award / Judgment
- Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: MIS-REPRESENTATION OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES OF $10,000
- Damage Amount Requested: $10,000.00
- Damages Granted: $10,150.00
- Arbitration Claim File Detail: 96-02504
- Arbitration Docket Number:
- Broker Comment: AWARDED FOR $7250.00 Not Provided
DISCLOSURE 7 –
- Event Date: 7/17/1996
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: VIRGINIA – STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION DIVISION OF SECURITIES
- Allegations: MARCO GUY FIORE, JR. OFFERED AND SOLD IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA SECURITIES TO A VIRGINIA INVESTOR, WITHOUT THE SECURITIES BEING REGISTERED UNDER THE VIRGINIA SECURITIES ACT OR THE SECURITIES OR TRANSACTIONS BEING EXEMPTED THEREFROM.
- Resolution: Decision
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Monetary/Fine
- Sanction Details :: Amount: $2,000.00
- Sanction Details: DEFENDANT FINED $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS OF VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 13.1-507 AND ASSESSED COST OF INVESTIGATION.
- Broker Comment: Not Provided
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.
- ALL-TECH DIRECT, INC. (CRD#: 13992) :: 7/6/1999 – 8/25/2000 :: MONTVALE, NJ
- NORTHEAST SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 25996) :: 9/13/1996 – 3/28/1997 :: MITCHELFIELD, NY
- NATIONWIDE SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 29720) :: 10/26/1995 – 6/26/1996 :: VALRICO, FL
- CHATFIELD DEAN & CO., INC. (CRD#: 14714) :: 8/29/1995 – 11/7/1995 :: GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO
- A. T. BROD & CO. INC. (CRD#: 1319) :: 12/6/1994 – 4/12/1995 :: CLEVELAND, OH
- ROBERT TODD FINANCIAL CORP. (CRD#: 7423) :: 4/22/1992 – 12/15/1994 :: NEW YORK, NY
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 Marco Guy Fiore, 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 Marco Fiore
In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.
Marco Guy Fiore – 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 (2225944) for the broker – Marco Guy Fiore
- 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.