FINRA

DeBouvre was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that she and another individual, Kim Kopacka, permitted and enabled a statutorily disqualified and barred person to conduct a securities business by allowing Kopacka's husband to associate with and conduct securities business through member firms and engage in activities requiring registration, despite the fact that he was barred from associating with member firms and therefore statutorily disqualified. The complaint alleges that for much of two decades, Kopacka and DeBouvre allowed Kopacka's husband to meet with new and existing firm customers and recommend the purchase and sales of securities to them, resulting in securities transactions of approximately $42.65 million and commissions of approximately $6.35 million. Kopacka and DeBouvre facilitated Kopacka's husband's securities business and helped him circumvent his statutory disqualification by, among other things, falsifying the documents supporting the transactions he recommended, approving the transactions, and concealing his statutory disqualification.

Decision & Order of Offer of Settlement

Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)

$10,000.00

Suspension

All capacities

15 months

11/4/2019

2/3/2021

Without admitting or denying the allegations, DeBouvre and Kopacka consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that they permitted and enabled a statutorily disqualified and barred person to conduct a securities business by allowing Kopacka's husband to associate with and conduct securities business through two member firms and engage in activities requiring registration, despite the fact that he was barred from associating with any member firms and therefore statutorily disqualified. The findings stated that for much of two decades, DeBouvre and Kopacka allowed Kopacka's husband to meet with new and existing firm customers and recommend the purchase and sales of securities to them, resulting in securities transactions of more than $40 million and commissions of more than $6 million. Kopacka's husband engaged in each firm's securities business and was at least indirectly controlled by the firms. Kopacka's husband was physically situated in a branch office; worked with and alongside registered representatives of the firms; opened new accounts at each firm; met with new and existing firm customers; discussed the nature and merits of investments with firm customers; corresponded with firm customers about their accounts; provided investment advice to firm customers; and recommended securities transactions to firm customers that the firms reviewed, approved, processed and recorded. DeBouvre and Kopacka facilitated Kopacka's husband's securities business and helped him circumvent his statutory disqualification by, among other things, falsifying the documents supporting the transactions he recommended, approving the transactions, and concealing his statutory disqualification.

Violation of Michigan Securities Act of 2008, Violation of Michigan Consumer Protection Act, Unsuitable recommendations, Violation of NASD/FINRA Rules 3010 & 3110, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Negligent Supervision, Breach of Contract

$30,000.00

$1,000.00

Violation of Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Unsuitable recommendation, Violation of securities act of 1933, violation of South Carolina uniform securities act, breach of fiduciary duty, common law fraud

$400,000.00

$16,000.00

Breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable recommendations/lack of due diligence, failure to supervise, negligence, breach of contract, continuing fraud, violation of securities laws

$335,000.00

Lack of due diligence, negligence, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty

$25,000.00

$15,000.00

Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Civil Conspiracy, Civil Rico, Civil Rico Conspriacy

$954,700.00

$13,000.00

unsuitable investments

$245,000.00

fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence

$100,000.00

Breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable recommendations/lack of due diligence, negligence, breach of contract, fraud, violation of securities laws

$285,000.00

misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence

$100,000.00

Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Unsuitable recommendations, lack of due diligence, negligence, breach of contract, fraud, violation of securities laws

$450,000.00

$80,000.00

Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Unsuitable recommendations, lack of due diligence, negligence, breach of contract, fraud, violation of securities laws

$320,000.00

$48,383.00