Peyton Nelson Jackson, of New York, New York, a stockbroker formerly registered with Alexander Capital, L.P., has been barred from associating with any Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) member in any capacity according to a Hearing Officer’s Default Decision containing findings that Jackson made unsuitable investment recommendations and defrauded customers. Department of Enforcement v. Peyton Nelson Jackson, No. 2016049252901 (Aug. 30, 2017).
According to the Decision, customers filed complaints against Jackson and his employing brokerage firms, alleging fraud and unsuitable investment recommendations. An investigation was reportedly launched by FINRA into Jackson’s activities, wherein FINRA requested that information, documentation and Jackson’s recorded testimony be provided. Yet, Jackson failed to provide FINRA with a response to seven of the regulator’s requests, resulting in a Complaint lodged against him for violation of FINRA Rules 2010 and 8210. The Decision revealed that FINRA’s Complaint was unanswered by Jackson, resulting in the Hearing Officer’s Default Decision.
This is not the first time that Jackson has been on the receiving end of a FINRA disciplinary action for wrongdoing. Particularly, he was previously fined $20,000.00 and suspended for six months from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity by consenting to findings that he failed to disclose outside brokerage holdings and outside investment and banking activities. Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent, No. 20120320958-01 (Apr. 28, 2016).
Additionally, FINRA Public Disclosure reveals that Jackson has been subject of thirteen customer initiated investment related disputes concerning accusations of his wrongdoing while he was employed with Dawson James Securities, Inc., McKim Capital, Legend Securities, Inc., and Alexander Capital. Specifically, on December 10, 2015, a customer initiated investment related written complaint involving Jackson’s conduct was settled for $3,500.00 in damages founded by accusations that Jackson made unsuitable investment recommendations and breached his fiduciary duties to the customer.
Thereafter, on November 25, 2015, a customer filed an investment related arbitration claim pertaining to Jackson’s activities, wherein the customer sought $700,000.000 in damages supported by allegations of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation, and suitability in reference to stock transactions placed in the customer’s investment portfolio. On January 4, 2016, another customer filed an investment related arbitration claim concerning Jackson’s activities, in which the customer sought $400,000.00 in damages based upon allegations that Jackson made unsuitable investment recommendations to the customer and sold away from his firm.
Moreover, from January 13, 2016 to January 15, 2016, three customers filed investment related arbitration claims regarding Jackson’s activities, where the customers requested a total of $700,000.00 in damages supported by accusations that Jackson violated Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 10(b) as well as Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 10b-5. Customers additionally alleged that Jackson neglected to deal fairly and in good faith, breached his contractual obligations, inappropriately managed the customers’ investments, effected over-the-counter equities transactions that were not suitable, and committed securities fraud.
Furthermore, from February 12, 2016, to May 24, 2016, two more customers filed investment related disputes concerning Jackson’s activities, in which they sought a total of $290,000.00 in damages based upon allegations including suitability, churning, misrepresentation, and unsuitable investment recommendations regarding over-the-counter equities transactions effected in the customers’ investment portfolios. On October 17, 2016, another customer filed an investment related arbitration claim regarding Jackson’s activities, where the customer sought $580,179.51 in damages supported by accusations that Jackson engaged in securities fraud in reference to the customer’s promissory note and equity transactions.
Jackson has been associated with eight different broker dealers, four of which have been expelled by securities regulators for violation of federal securities laws or are otherwise defunct.
Guiliano Law Group
Our practice is limited to the representation of investors. We accept representation on a contingent fee basis, meaning there is no cost to you unless we make a recovery for you. There is never any charge for a consultation or an evaluation of your claim. For more information, contact us at (877) SEC-ATTY.
For more information concerning common claims against stockbrokers and investment professionals, please visit us at securitiesarbitrations.com
To learn more about FINRA Securities Arbitration, and the legal process, please visit us at securitiesarbitrations.com
