FINRA

Without admitting or denying the findings, LaBelle consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide information or documents requested by FINRA in connection with its investigation of his possible violation of a prior AWC.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Bar (Permanent)

All Capacities

Indefinite

7/23/2021

FINRA

Without admitting or denying the findings, LaBelle consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that, while associated with a member firm, he participated in an outside business activity involving a real estate development project that was financed with money lent by one of his customers without providing prior written notice to his firm. The findings stated that LaBelle falsely confirmed that he had fully disclosed his outside business activities on two annual compliance questionnaires submitted to his firm.

Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

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

$5,000.00

Suspension

All Capacities

three months

1/20/2020

4/19/2020

Filing a false criminal complaint

Misleading a judge

Convicted

Misleading a clerk

Convicted

CUSTOMER ALLEGES REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAX BILL ON ASSETS THAT CUSTOMER HERSELF LIQUIDATED WITHOUT ANY KNOWLEDGE BY REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE.

$23,000.00

CUSTOMER LIQUIDATED TAX DEFERRED RETIREMENT ASSETS WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE. WHEN CUSTOMER ASKED REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE TO DEPOSIT FUNDS IN HER EXISTING TAXABLE ACCOUNT, REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE ASKED IF THEY WERE RETIREMENT FUNDS OF ANY SORT. CUSTOMER STATED THAT THEY WERE NOT, BUT NOW REQUEST REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HER TAXES DUE TO HER OWN ERROR.

CLIENT CLAIMS SHE TOLD THE FORMER FINANCIAL ADVISOR NOT TO PUT HER INTO ANY BONDS DUE TO THE RISING INTEREST RATE CONCERNS. CLIENT IS UPSET WITH THE LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH HER ACCOUNT.

$5,000.00

FROM 7/1/11 TO 11/30/11 CLIENT LISTS MULTIPLE ISSUES: 1) FRUSTRATED SHE HAS ACCESS TO ONLY FA & BOA, NOT HOME OFFICE 2) INDICATES SHE TOLD THE FA SHE DID NOT WANT HIM TO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN HER ACCOUNT, WHEN ASKED HOW HE WAS PAID, THE FA TOLD HER HE WAS PAID BY EDJ, THEN DURING THE 4TH MEETING WAS TOLD HER ACCOUNT WAS COMMISSION BASED 3) WASN'T INFORMED BEFORE TRANSFER OF ASSETS TOOK PLACE, SO THAT SHE COULD MAKE A COURTESY CALL TO FORMER FIRM 4) FRIENDS OPINIONS ARE EDJ WAS OVERCHARGING FOR THE TRADES, CLIENT INDICATES SHE WAS UNAWARE OF THE ENORMOUS PRICE TO PAY, THOUGH THE FA EXPLAINED UP-FRONT COMMISSIONS, HE GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THE INVESTMENT COULD BOUNCE BACK QUICKLY, WHICH IT HAS NOT. SHE INDICATES 'DOUBLE DIPPING' WHERE SHE TRANSFERRED TARGET STOCK IN, IT WAS SOLD, ONLY TO BE PURCHASED AGAIN LATER. 5) CLIENT WAS UNAWARE OF TAX CONSEQUENCES OF TRADES 6) SOLD CHEVRON TO BE MORE GREEN, FA RECOMMENDED OCCIDENTAL, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO CHEVRON, RESULTING IN MORE COMMISSION. SHE INDICATES ALL ASSETS TRANSFERRED IN SHOULD HAVE TOTALED $874,623, HOWEVER AS OF 8/18/11, THE VALUE WAS $80,516 LESS, AFTER SELLING TWO STOCKS. 7) AN ANNUITY WAS PRESENTED, A MONTH LATER THE CLIENT REALIZED THE FA MADE THE PURCHASE, THE ORDER WAS CANCELED 8) CLIENT LEARNED HER MONEY WAS INVESTED IN A SHARE MUTUAL FUNDS WITH ENORMOUS FEES AND COMMISSIONS FROM OTHER PEOPLE, AND IS FRUSTRATED THAT T. ROWE PRICE OR VANGUARD WEREN'T OFFERED FOR LOWER FEES 9) DURING MARKET VOLATILITY, EDJ DIDN'T PROVIDE UPDATES BY EMAIL, MAIL OR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE LIKE OTHER FIRMS 10) BROUGHT FRIEND TO EDJ MEETING, FRIEND INDICATES FEES ARE 'EGREGIOUS'. CLIENT IS REQUESTING ALL SALES CHARGES AND FEES CHARGED TO HER ACCOUNT BE RETURNED.

$5,000.00

DENIED: 1) FA EXPLAINED HOME OFFICE SUPPORT TO BRANCHES, WHICH ARE CONSIDERED THE PRIMARY CONTACT. CLIENT SERVICES WAS PROVIDED TO CLIENT ALSO. 2) FA DISCUSSED SALES CHARGES, COMMISSIONS AND FEES IN 1ST MEETING. 3RD MEETING WAS A REVIEW OF ANALYSIS REPORTS; THE EXISTING MANAGED ACCOUT WITH US TRUST, AND TWO RECOMMENDED PORTFOLIOS. COMPARED FEE BASED VS. COMMISSION BASED, SALES CHARGES, FEES, COMMISSIONS AND ONGOING EXPENSES. THESE REPORTS, PROSPECTUSES AND FIRM RESEARCH REPORTS WERE GIVEN TO THE CLIENT TO TAKE HOME. 3) AT THE TIME THE TRANSFER PAPERS WERE SIGNED, THE FA SUGGESTED CALLING THE FORMER FIRM. 4) SEE NO. 2. 150 SHARES OF TARGET WERE TRANSFERRED INTO THE ACCOUNT, 50 SHARES WERE SOLD, 100 SHARES REMAINED IN THE ACCOUNT. THERE WERE NO ADDITIONAL PURCHASES. 5) FA RECOMMENDED THE CLIENT REVIEW THE TAX RAMIFICATIONS BEFORE TRADING. 6) THE FA EXPLAINED SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION AND SUGGESTED MAINTAINING A CHEVRON POSITION. THE CLIENT DID NOT WANT CHEVRON, SPECIFICALLY. SHE WAS OPEN TO A DIFFERENT ENERGY COMPANY, RESEARCH REPORTS WERE PROVIDED FOR OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM AND TRADES CONFIRMED. THE FA GAVE THE OPTION OF LIQUIDATING THROUGH FORMER FIRM, CLIENT ELECTED TO TRANSFER THEN LIQUIDATE ALL POSITIONS. THE TOTAL COMMISSION ASSESSED FOR THE CLIENT WAS $28,039, THE DIFFERENCE WAS SHORT TERM MARKET FLUCTUATION. 7) THE ANNUITY WAS PRESENTED, TRADE CONFIRMED AND PAPERWORK SIGNED. THE CLIENT LATER CHANGED HER MIND. 8) SEE NO. 2. OPTION PROVIDED TO MAINTAIN T. ROWE PRICE FUNDS, OR REPOSITION TO OBTAIN BREAK POINTS WITH RECOMMENDED PORTFOLIO. 9) FA WAS OUT OF THE OFFICE WHEN CLIENT CALLED WITH CONCERNS, HE CALLED HER BACK FROM HIS CELL PHONE, BUT SHE WOULDN'T CALL HIM WHILE HE WAS ON VACATION. THE CLIENT TURNED TO FRIENDS FOR ADVICE. 10) FRIEND COMPARING ONLINE TRADING TO FULL SERVICE EDJ.