The allegations refer to activity in the clients account from 2019-2023 when Bucher was terminated from Pinnacle Investments. Client claims investments were unsuitable and not authorized. Additionally client claims Bucher did not properly explain the investments that were in the account which led to losses in the account.

$50,000.00

$20,000.00

Claimants assert claims of breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, violation of Illinois Securities Act, negligence/negligent misrepresentation/omission, fraud, restitution, and negligent supervision relating to unspecified investments. 7/1/2018 to 7/1/2023

$2,000,000.00

The clients allege that Bucher engaged in churning, unauthorized trading and unsuitable investments. The time period is July 2018 to July 2023.

$2,000,000.00

FINRA

Without admitting or denying the findings, Bucher consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to produce information and documents requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation into the allegations his member firm made in a Form U5 filing. The findings stated that allegations included communicating with customers via text messages and personal email. Although Bucher produced some information in response to the request, he failed to produce other information, including the requested customer communication.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Bar (Permanent)

All capacities

Indefinite

12/21/2023

Client alleges investments were not in line with stated objective and transactions were not authorized. Client states this activity spans the length of the relationship with the representative,

$77,772.32

Customer alleges account was not managed in a manner consistent with stated objectives and transactions were made without their knowledge. Client indicated this has been consistent throughout the relationship with the representative.

PINNACLE INVESTMENTS, LLC

Discharged

Violating company policy by communicating with a client through text and failing to disclose that violation on a FINRA 8210 form.

Pinnacle Compliance contacted me after reaching out to a client and having concerns regarding my interactions with this client and during this review I admitted to having text based communication with the client contrary to my prior representations. Pinnacle decided that this violation of their rules was worthy of termination.

On 6/6/23 Pinnacle compliance spoke to client as a followup to client e-mail referencing a decline in bis account values. During this call no formal complaint was made by the client nor was any claim of damages made. Client only reiterated his decline in value as well as a decline in verbal communication during 2022/23. After further investigation Pinnacle determined that the broker had been primarily communicating about the accounts with this client through text instead of verbally. That is a violation of company policy and the broker was terminated. As of the last call made by Pinnacle compliance to the client no formal complaint or damage claim has been made by the client outside of the use of unregulated texting.

Through email the client is seeking an explanation for the securities held in their account. As there are unrealized losses they are questioning as well as how that can be considered safe investing with losses. The client indicated they directed the representative to use ultra safe investments. The client also indicated that they are responsible for the gains and losses in their account as they direct the representative on certain securities they would like to buy. The date of the email is 3/23/2022.

$18,173.67

Brokers Comment: [REDACTED] has been a client of mine for nearly 20 years, We began our relationship with him being a referral from his brother, who had already been a client of mine for several years. He transferred in several accounts which predominantly held low priced and penny stocks. During the majority of the relationship I had been investing him in fixed income and dividend paying equities. He would occasionally make unsolicited purchases of low priced stocks. Over the last couple years [REDACTED] had been getting more interested in the stock market and was reading and listening to various financial experts. He began making unsolicited investments in leveraged stock index and commodities ETFs as well as tech, EV, and crypto stocks. At one point he added funds to the account and decided to invest half in our usual income style investments and the rest in some of mine and his stock recommendations. Right before the e-mail he did several unsolicited trades. Shortly after that the e-mail was sent voicing his frustration over the declining account values. I contacted him immediately and did an extended review of his various accounts and during those discussions I laid out the fact that the vast majority of the stocks he was concerned about were his selections. This calmed him down and soon enough his concerns were all addressed and the matter was settled without issue. Three months later his concerns over the economy and stock market prompted him to call me and direct me to sell off his stocks and keep his income items. This matter was basically closed until FINRA identified the e-mail during a review and declared the e-mail to be a formal client complaint that needed to be placed on my U4. This is despite the fact that the matter had been handled and cleared up 13 months earlier without any further action or communication from the client on this issue,

$30,325.23

Civil

I disagree with this finding. This was a contractual issue that I feel was wrongly interpreted. Due to unreasonable delays by the Plaintiff the resulting judgement included a large amount of interest added to the judgement. In 2015, during the course of my divorce I hired an accountant, the Plaintiff, to be an expert witness through my divorce attorney and I paid the Plaintiff the required contractual amount. The contractual dispute resulted from the Plaintiff declaring on the day of trial that he would not testify on my behalf for the vast majority of my case and actually ended up testifying against my interests in court. Immediately after the trial, I received an additional bill for approximately $15,000 from the accountant. Due to the failure of the Plaintiff to perform his contractual duties I refused to pay the Plaintiff. Discussions occurred regarding this bill and the Plaintiff appeared to drop the matter. I was made aware of the continuation of the matter in court late in 2019 and a 5 minute ZOOM hearing was held on August 25, 2020. The court awarded in favor of the Plaintiff and due to the length of time involved, five years, the interest charges resulted in the doubling damages.

RAYMOND JAMES & ASSOCIATES

Voluntary Resignation

FA was interviewed concerning a trade he had executed in a deceased client's account and was also notified that the Firm would be contacting some of his clients to determine whether he had spoken with them prior to executing trades in their non-discretionary accounts. FA resigned after several of his clients were contacted and he was made aware that multiple clients had stated he had not been speaking with them prior to executing trades in their accounts.

Following several months of reviewing employment offers, I tendered my resignation to RJ after 12 years of service without a single client complaint or disciplinary action. RJ delivered a "clean" U5 to my new firm, Oppenheimer, with no client issues reported or open investigations identified in their filing. Weeks later, RJ inexplicably amended their prior filing and completely changed the circumstances surrounding my voluntary resignation to one of my departing under a previously unreported investigation and allegations of improper trading practices by multiple accounts. Following a 5 month long investigation into those claims and allegations, RJ has subsequently amended their second U5 filing to state that the inquiry has been closed and that there were no reportable client complaints or events uncovered during their investigation.

Short Sale

Short Sale + Promisory Note

In February of 2013 I was divorced and signed a marital settlement agreement. As part of that agreement I was required to transfer title of my home to my former spouse and she in turn would assume full obligation for the property and would indemnify and hold me harmless for the outstanding mortgage. After not paying 32 months of mortgage payments and defaulting on her obligation, the home was put in foreclosure. In February of 2018, a short sale was approved by the mortgage company. However, the PMI company would not approve the deal unless I agreed to sign a promissory note to cover the mortgage principal deficiency as well as all the outstanding interest, penalties, taxes, insurance, legal fees, and realtor fees. In order to avoid having to report a far more damaging foreclosure on my professional licenses, I signed the note and the matter was closed.

FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP, UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, MISREPRESENTATION & COMMISSIONS, BREACH OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, COMMON LAW FRAUD

$70,000.00

$10,000.00

RESPONDENT IS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE AND SHALL PAY TO CLAIMANT $10,000.00

A. G. EDWARDS & SONS, INC.

Discharged

NONE EXERCISED TIME DISCRESSION BEYOND 24 HOURS WITHOUT MORE THAN VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS. RULES REQUIRE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR LONGER THAN 24 HOURS. THERE WAS NO CUSTOMER COMPLAINT. CLIENT WAS HAPPY AND QUITE SUPRISED BY MY DISMISSAL OVER THIS ISSUE.

CLIENT LEFT OPEN, VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS WITH ME DUE TO HER DISLIKE OF THE GTC SYSTEM. OPEN GTC ORDERS HAD RESULTED IN POOR AND UNWANTED EXECUTIONS. A PERSONAL FAX SENT BY THE CLIENT MADE REFERENCE TO OUR OPEN ORDERS THAT HAD BEEN IN EFFECT FOR LONGER THAN 24 HOURS. AFTER A SIX-WEEK REVIEW, A.G. EDWARDS DISCHARGED ME FOR EXECUTING THIS CLIENT'S ORDER BEYOND THE TIME DISCRETION LIMITS. THERE WAS NO CLIENT COMPLAINT. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE CLIENT SPOKE VERY HIGHLY OF ME TO MY A.G. EDWARDS MANAGER.

NONSUITABILITY

$13,500.00

PRUDENTIAL SETTLED WITH [CUSTOMER] FOR $13,500 ON 6 DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS UNDER HER CONTROL. THIS WAS DONE CONTRARY TO MY WISHES AND TO THE EVIDENCE.I DID NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE SETTLEMENT. FOLLOWING MY DISCHARGE FROM PRUDENTIAL, THE NEW BROKER LAUNCHED A SLANDEROUS ATTACK AGAINST ME AND THE INVESTMENTS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENT. HIS SLANDER AND FEAR TACTICS ARE DOCUMENTED BY [FAMILY MEMBER'S] OWN FAMILY MEMBERS WHO WROTE LETTERS COMMENDING MY TEN YEARS OF SERVICE TO THEM. THIS COMPLAINT WAS CAUSED BY THE PRUDENTIAL BROKER AS REPORTED BY MY LAWYER AND MYSELF TO THE COMPLIANCE OFFICER AT PRUDENTIAL'S BRANCH OFFICE.

PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES INCORPORATED

Discharged

NONE DISCHARGED FOR ENTEREING ORDER BY ORDER OF A POA AFTER THE CLIENT HAD DIED. FAILED TO CLOSE ACCOUNT AND REOPEN UNDER DECEASED TITLE.

SHORTLY AFTER PUDENTIAL WAS INFORMED THAT I HAD SIGNED A LETTER OF INTENT TO JOIN A.G. EDWARDS, I WAS DISCHARGED. THE REASON FOR TERMINATION WAS "EXECUTING ORDERS IN A DECEASED ACCOUNT." THESE ORDERS WERE EXECUTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE POA WHO HAD BEEN MANAGING THE ACCOUNTS FOR MONTHS. IN ADDITION TO BEING THE POA, THE CLIENT WAS THE BENEFICIARY OF THE NUMEROUS ACCOUNTS. (AS DOCUMENTED IN THE WILL THAT WAS ON FILE.) FOLLOWING MY SURPRISE TERMINATION, THE CLIENT CONTACTED THE COMPLIANCE OFFICER BY PHONE AND IN WRITING THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE DONE AT HER REQUEST TO MEET FUNERAL AND MEDICAL EXPENSES OF HER DECEASED MOTHER. THERE WAS NO COMPLAINT BY THE CLIENT OR THE LAWYER HANDLING THE ESTATE. IN FACT, THE CLIENT WROTE A LETTER OF COMMENDATION.