Michael David Mathias of Mount Kisco New York is a stockbroker currently registered with Summit Brokerage Services Inc. who is the subject of a customer initiated investment related arbitration claim where the customer requested four hundred thirty-three thousand six hundred eight-seven dollars in damages founded on accusations of suitability relating to the customer’s variable annuity investment. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Arbitration No. 17-02015 (Aug. 11 2017).
FINRA Public Disclosure reveals that Mathias has been referenced in nineteen additional customer initiated investment related disputes pertaining to allegations of Mathias’ misconduct while employed with Interstate Financial, National Planning Corporation, and Gerald S. Berger, Inc. Particularly, a customer initiated investment related arbitration claim involving Mathias’ conduct was settled for $70,000.00 in damages based upon accusations that Mathias effected unsuitable limited partnership interest and real estate investment trust transactions with the customer’s investable assets. National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) Arbitration No. 97-01308 (Oct. 29, 1997).
On May 29, 2001, a customer filed an investment related written complaint pertaining to Mathias’ conduct in which the customer sought $10,000.00 in damages supported by allegations that the customer was placed into a variable annuity that was not suitable for the customer. Then, on June 6, 2002, a customer initiated investment related written complaint regarding Mathias’ activities was resolved for $18,523.66 in damages supported by accusations that the customer’s variable life insurance policy purchase had been induced by misrepresentations. Further, a customer initiated investment related arbitration claim involving Mathias’ conduct was settled for $17,500.00 in damages founded on allegations that a variable annuity was recommended to the customer that was not appropriate. NASD Arbitration No. 04-02936 (Oct. 18, 2004).
Thereafter, a customer initiated investment related arbitration claim involving Mathias’ conduct was settled for $65,000.00 in damages supported by accusations that Mathias made unsuitable investment recommendations to the customer concerning variable annuity investments by disregarding the customer’s objectives for investing and exposure to risk. NASD Arbitration No. 03-03229 (Jan. 13, 2005). The customer additionally alleged that Mathias neglected to appropriately service the customer’s investment accounts. Moreover, a customer initiated investment related arbitration claim regarding Mathias’ activities was resolved for $228,030.25 in damages based upon allegations of suitability; the customer’s assets were not allocated in a manner that was consistent with the customer’s objectives for investing. NASD Arbitration No. 03-07413 (Mar. 7, 2006).
Subsequently, a customer was awarded $87,785.69 in damages according to an investment related arbitration claim involving Mathias’ misconduct, based upon findings that the customer’s losses on a variable annuity stemmed from being poorly advised, and that it was not suitable for the customer to have been sold the annuity. American Arbitration Association (AAA) No. 04923-51840 (July 6, 2006). Further, on March 24, 2017, a customer filed an investment related written complaint involving Mathias’ conduct where the customer requested $100,000.00 in damages supported by accusations that Mathias failed to inform the customer about a variable annuity’s death benefit feature.
The information contained herein has been obtained from reliable sources however may not be accurate and is not guaranteed by us. Readers are encouraged to undertake their own independent investigation and evaluation of the relevant facts. All claims and allegations are subject to adjudication, decisions may be subject to appeal, and no inference is intended, nor should any inference be made from any information contained herein from any source.
This posting and the information on our website is for general information purposes only. This content should be not considered legal advice, and any responses, comments, e-mails, other communications do not form any attorney client relationship. Attorney Advertisement. See Important Disclaimer
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
