Mark Crosby Nevdahl – 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 Mark Crosby Nevdahl.
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 Mark Crosby Nevdahl. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.
About Mark Nevdahl
Mark Crosby Nevdahl is an Investment Adviser. Mark Crosby Nevdahl’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 1298931 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1298931.
Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Mark Crosby Nevdahl.
Mark Crosby Nevdahl 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 Mark Crosby Nevdahl’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.
DISCLOSURE 1 –
- Event Date: 9/5/2014
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC ADMIN RELEASES 33-9642, 34-73016; INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT RELEASE 40-31243, SEPTEMBER 5, 2014: THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIVE AND CEASE-AND-DESIST PROCEEDINGS BE, AND HEREBY ARE, INSTITUTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 8A OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, SECTION 15(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AND SECTION 9(B) OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940 AGAINST MARK CROSBY NEVDAHL (RESPONDENT). 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, WHICH ARE ADMITTED, RESPONDENT CONSENTS TO THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER INSTITUTING ADMINISTRATIVE AND CEASE-AND-DESIST PROCEEDINGS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 8A OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, SECTION 15(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AND SECTION 9(B) OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940, MAKING FINDINGS, IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS AND A CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER. THESE PROCEEDINGS ARISE OUT OF RESPONDENT’S ROLE AS A REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE AND A TRUSTEE FOR CERTAIN OF HIS FORMER CLIENTS WHO HELD THE MAJORITY OF STOCK IN HEART TRONICS, INC. THE CLIENTS ENLISTED NEVDAHL TO ACT AS TRUSTEE FOR A NUMBER OF PURPORTEDLY BLIND TRUSTS TO CREATE THE FA\u00c7ADE THAT THE SHARES WERE UNDER HIS CONTROL, AS AN INDEPENDENT TRUSTEE. HOWEVER, THE TRUSTS WERE BLIND IN NAME ONLY, AND NEVDAHL MET HIS CLIENTS’ REGULAR DEMANDS FOR CASH BY CONTINUALLY SELLING HEART TRONICS STOCK THOUGH THE TRUSTS. THE TRUSTS WERE FURTHER DESIGNED TO AVOID THE REQUIRED REGULAR PUBLIC DISCLOSURES UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS OF HIS CLIENTS’ STOCK SALES. BETWEEN APPROXIMATELY DECEMBER 2005 AND SEPTEMBER 2008, INDIVIDUALS, THROUGH TRANSACTIONS EXECUTED BY NEVDAHL, SECRETLY DIRECTED THE SALE OF MORE THAN THREE MILLION SHARES OF HEART TRONICS STOCK THROUGH THE TRUSTS, FOR GROSS PROCEEDS OF MORE THAN $5.8 MILLION. NEVDAHL WAS PAID BROKERAGE COMMISSIONS AND TRUSTEE FEES FOR HIS WORK AS TRUSTEE AND BROKER FOR THE PURPORTEDLY BLIND TRUSTS. AS A RESULT OF THE CONDUCT, NEVDAHL WILLFULLY2 VIOLATED SECTION 17(A)(3) OF THE SECURITIES ACT, WHICH MAKES IT UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON IN THE OFFER OR SALE OF ANY SECURITIES BY THE USE OF ANY MEANS OR INSTRUMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION OR COMMUNICATION IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE OR BY THE USE OF MAILS, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO ENGAGE IN ANY TRANSACTION, PRACTICE OR COURSE OF BUSINESS WHICH OPERATES OR WOULD OPERATE AS A FRAUD OR DECEIT UPON THE PURCHASER.
- Resolution: Order
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Cease and Desist Sanctions: Prohibition Sanctions: Suspension
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: SEE COMMENT
- Duration: SIX MONTHS
- Start Date: 9/15/2014
- End Date: 3/14/2015 Sanctions: Undertaking
- Sanctions: RESPONDENT HAS UNDERTAKEN TO PROVIDE THE COMMISSION, WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER THE END OF THE SIX MONTH SUSPENSION PERIOD, AN AFFIDAVIT THAT HE HAS COMPLIED WITH THE SANCTIONS. RESPONDENT NEVDAHL SHALL CEASE AND DESIST FROM COMMITTING OR CAUSING ANY VIOLATIONS AND ANY FUTURE VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 17(A)(3) OF THE SECURITIES ACT.
DISCLOSURE 2 –
- Event Date: 12/20/2011
- Disclosure Type: Civil
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC LITIGATION RELEASE 22204, DECEMBER 20, 2011: THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FILED A LAWSUIT IN FEDERAL COURT IN LOS ANGELES CHARGING SEVEN DEFENDANTS, INCLUDING A CALIFORNIA LAWYER, IN A SERIES OF BRAZEN FRAUDULENT SCHEMES DESIGNED TO ARTIFICIALLY INFLATE THE SECURITIES OF A COMPANY, WHILE THE LAWYER SECRETLY MADE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM SELLING THE STOCK. THE SEVEN DEFENDANTS CHARGED ARE: A COMPANY, HEADQUARTERED IN CALIFORNIA THAT PURPORTS TO SELL A HEART MONITORING DEVICE. COMPANY COMMON STOCK WAS FORMERLY LISTED ON THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE BUT IS NOW QUOTED ON THE OTC LINK; A CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY FROM HIDDEN HILLS, CA WHO WAS THE ARCHITECT AND PRINCIPAL BENEFICIARY OF THE FRAUD SCHEMES. THE ATTORNEY CONTROLLED MANY OF THE COMPANY’S BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURES; A FORMER PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL PLAYER FROM ENCINO, CA AND ONE OF THE COMPANY’S CO-CEOS FROM OCTOBER 2008 THROUGH JUNE 2011; A FORMER HOLLYWOOD EXECUTIVE FROM BEVERLY HILLS, CA AND THE ANOTHER OF THE COMPANY’S CO-CEOS SINCE JUNE 2008; AN UNLICENSED ELECTRICIAN FROM BOCA RATON WHO WORKED AS THE ATTORNEY’S CHAUFFER AND HANDYMAN WHILE CARRYING OUT THE FRAUD WITH THE ATTORNEY; MARK C. NEVDAHL OF SPOKANE, WA, THE TRUSTEE AND STOCK BROKER FOR A NUMBER OF NOMINEE ACCOUNTS THE ATTORNEY USED TO UNLAWFULLY SELL COMPANY STOCK; AND A STOCK PROMOTER FROM SAN CLEMENTE, CA PAID TO TOUT COMPANY STOCK TO INVESTORS. THE SEC’S COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT THE COMPANY FRAUDULENTLY AND REPEATEDLY ANNOUNCED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SALES ORDERS FOR ITS PRODUCT BETWEEN 2006 AND 2008. IN FACT, ACCORDING TO THE COMPLAINT, THE COMPANY NEVER HAD VIABLE SALES ORDERS FROM ACTUAL CUSTOMERS, BUT TWO OF THE DEFENDANTS FABRICATED NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT THE FALSE DISCLOSURES TO THE PUBLIC. AS ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT, THE ATTORNEY PROFITED BY CAUSING THE COMPANY TO UNLAWFULLY PAY ONE OF THE DEFENDANTS APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION IN CASH AND COMPANY STOCK PURSUANT TO A SHAM CONSULTING AGREEMENT. THE DEFENDANT KICKED-BACK SUBSTANTIALLY ALL THE PROCEEDS TO THE ATTORNEY. THE COMPLAINT ALSO ALLEGES THAT IN 2008 THE COMPANY INSTALLED ONE OF THE DEFENDANTS, A CELEBRITY ATHLETE, AND ANOTHER DEFENDANT, A FOUNDER OF A WELL-KNOWN TALENT AGENCY, AS FIGUREHEAD CEOS TO GENERATE PUBLICITY FOR THE COMPANY AND FOSTER INVESTOR CONFIDENCE. HOWEVER, THE SEC ALLEGES THAT THE TWO DEFENDANTS RARELY QUESTIONED THE ATTORNEY’S FRAUDULENT AGENDA AND ABDICATED THEIR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES TO SHAREHOLDERS BY SIGNING, OR AUTHORIZING TO BE SIGNED, FALSE SEC FILINGS AND FALSE CERTIFICATIONS UNDER THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002. IN ADDITION, THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT ATTORNEY AND ONE OF THE DEFENDANTS TOGETHER DEFRAUDED AN INDIVIDUAL INVESTOR INTO MAKING A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT IN THE COMPANY BASED ON FALSE REPRESENTATIONS THAT HIS CAPITAL WOULD FUND THE COMPANY’S OPERATIONS. INSTEAD, THE ATTORNEY AND DEFENDANT DIVERTED THE INVESTOR’S PROCEEDS FOR THEIR PERSONAL USE, INCLUDING PURCHASING COMPANY STOCK IN DEFENDANT’S PERSONAL BROKERAGE ACCOUNT TO CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF VOLUME AND DEMAND FOR THE STOCK. THE ATTORNEY ALSO HIRED PROMOTERS TO TOUT COMPANY STOCK ON THE INTERNET. ACCORDING TO THE COMPLAINT, ONE SUCH PROMOTER, ANOTHER DEFENDANT, SOLICITED NUMEROUS INVESTMENT ADVISERS, RETAIL AND INSTITUTIONAL BROKERS, AND OTHER INVESTORS TO BUY COMPANY STOCK, BUT FAILED TO DISCLOSE HE WAS BEING PAID BY THE COMPANY IN EXCHANGE FOR HIS PROMOTION. WHILE THE ATTORNEY WAS ORCHESTRATING HIS CAMPAIGN OF MISINFORMATION AND OTHER SCHEMES DESIGNED TO INFLATE THE COMPANY’S STOCK PRICE, THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT HE AND HIS WIFE, A RELIEF DEFENDANT, (CONTINUED IN COMMENT)
- Resolution: Judgment Rendered
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)
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.
- WORLD EQUITY GROUP, INC. (CRD#: 29087) :: 6/12/2008 – 12/23/2011 :: SPOKANE, WA
- PACIFIC WEST SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 6390) :: 11/20/2007 – 7/9/2008 :: SPOKANE, WA
- REGAL SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 7297) :: 7/19/2005 – 12/12/2007 :: SPOKANE, WA
- NATIONAL SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 7569) :: 7/29/1985 – 7/18/2005 :: BOCA RATON, FL
- NIELSON AND CLARK INC. (CRD#: 13508) :: 9/24/1984 – 7/29/1985
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 Mark Crosby Nevdahl, 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 Mark Nevdahl
In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.
Mark Crosby Nevdahl – 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 (1298931) for the broker – Mark Crosby Nevdahl
- 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.