Frank Tae Kim Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Frank Tae Kim  – and the firm that employs him or her – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

If you are like most people, before you go out to dinner at a new restaurant, you probably take a quick look at the reviews. This makes sense; you are going to pay for an expensive dinner, and you need to be sure that you are getting a good value.

Yet, when choosing a financial advisor, many people fail to conduct this same level of due diligence. Before turning over access to your money, you need to be sure that you have found a financial advisor that you can trust. Here, our audit report, including details of allegations, complaints, and sanctions will help you decide whether or not to invest with Frank Tae Kim.

BrokerComplaints.com is currently investigating allegations related to Frank Tae Kim. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.

About Frank Kim

Frank Tae Kim is an Investment Adviser. Frank Tae Kim’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 1946186 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1946186.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Frank Tae Kim.

Frank Tae Kim has previously been reprimanded and has disclosures and/or client dispute(s) listed at FINRA BrokerCheck.

Accusations and Disclosures

You can find below, a quick snapshot of Frank Tae Kim’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 4/22/2014
• Disclosure Type: Judgment / Lien
• Disclosure Resolution:
• Disclosure Detail :: Judgment/Lien Amount: $34,215.86
• Judgment/Lien Type: Civil

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 9/17/2012
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Settled
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR INVESTMENT.
• Settlement Amount: $42,000.00
• Arbitration Docket Number:

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 8/30/2010
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: CLAIMANT, A RESIDENT OF NEW JERSEY, ALLEGES MISREPRESENTATION AGAINST FA FOR THE PURCHASE OF A NATIONWIDE EVERGREEN ULTRA ANNUITY FROM 2001-2007. CLAIMANT SEEKS DAMAGES OF APPROXIMATELY $290,000.
• Damage Amount Requested: $290,000.00
• Arbitration Docket Number:
• Broker Comment: ON NOVEMBER 18, 2011, THE PANEL GRANTED RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS; CLAIMANT’S CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED IN THEIR ENTIRETY.

DISCLOSURE 4 – 

• Event Date: 2/6/2004
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Settled
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: NEW JERSEY RESIDENT PURCHASED AN EVERGREEN ULTRA ADVANTAGE NON-QUALIFIED VARIABLE ANNUITY ON OR ABOUT 8/1/97. THE CLIENT INVESTED $138,909.70 IN THE ANNUITY. THE CLIENT CLAIMS THAT THE FA MISREPRESENTED THE SALE OF THE ANNUITY AND THEN THAT THE FA WAS NEGLIGENT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PRODUCT. THE CLIENT SEEKS DAMAGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,909.70. THE CLIENT TOOK ANNUAL DISBURSEMENTS FROM THE ANNUITY AND ACTUAL LOSSES APPEAR TO BE APPROXIMATELY $10,653.32. ARBITRATION FILED ON 08/23/2004. ALLEGATIONS: CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT ACCOUNT DOMICILED IN NEW JERSEY OFFICE SUFFERED LOSS AS A RESULT OF UNSUITABLE PURCHASES & MISREPRESENTATION. CLAIMANT ALSO CLAIMS FA FAILED TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS TO SELL HIS EVERGREEN FUND AND ALLEGED PLACED HIS ACCOUNT ON MARGIN WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT BETWEEN ACCOUNT DATES 1997 AND 2003. CLAIMED DAMAGES OF $300,000.
• Damage Amount Requested: $300,000.00
• Settlement Amount: $21,000.00
• Arbitration Claim Filed Detail: 04-05795
• Arbitration Docket Number:
• Broker Comment: ARBITRATION FILED ON 8/23/2004.

DISCLOSURE 5 – 

• Event Date: 1/8/2003
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Denied
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: NEW JERSEY CLIENT ALLEGED MUTUAL FUNDS FA RECOMMENED IN 3/02 WERE UNSUITABLE. REQUESTS FULL COMPENSATION FOR ALL LOSSES. LOSSES ESTIMATED TO BE OVER $5,000.00
• Damage Amount Requested: $5,001.00
• Arbitration Docket Number:
• Broker Comment: GEORGIA RESIDENT CLAIMED THAT THE FA MISHANDLED HIS ACCOUNT(S) AND HIS WIFE ACCOUNT(S). THE CLIENT ALLEGED THAT FROM JUNE 2000 THROUGH DECEMBER 2002 HIS ACCOUNT(S) DECLINED IN VALUE FROM $97,000 TO $20,000. THE CLIENT ALSO ALLEGED THAT HIS WIFE’S ACCOUNT(S) LOST APPROXIMATELY $13,000 DURNING THE SAME TIME PERIOD. THE CLIENT CLAIMED THAT WHEN HE SPOKE TO THE FA ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AND ASKED IF HE AND HIS WIFE SHOULD LIQUIDATE THEIR ACCOUNTS THE FA ADVISED HIM NOT TO BECAUSE THEY WOULD REALIZE TOO MUCH IN LOSSES. THE CLIENT CLAIMED THAT HE AND HIS WIFE WNATED SAFE AND CONSERVATIVE INVESTMENTS.

DISCLOSURE 6 – 

• Event Date: 11/29/1994
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Settled
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: INVESTMENT NOT SUITABLE FOR CUSTOMERS COMPANY DAY TO DAY OPERATING ACCOUNT
• Damage Amount Requested: $25,000.00
• Settlement Amount: $25,000.00
• Arbitration Docket Number:
• Broker Comment: BROKER DEALER SETTLED OR $25,000.00 AT THE TIME OF THE TRANSACTION THE CUSTOMER MADE IT CLEAR TO MYSELF THAT THEIR ACCOUNT WAS NOT AN ACCOUNT FOR DAY TO DAY TRANSACTION. CUSTOMERS AND MYSELF BO TH AGRED THAT THE INVESTMENT WAS APPROPRIATE. MY OPINION IS THAT THE INVESTMEN T DID NOT PERFORM FOR THEM AND THEREFORE THEIR OPINION CHANGED ABOUT THE NATUR E OF THE ACCOUNT.

According to a study prepared for the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, 80 percent of American investors report that they have been solicited to participate in a fraud scheme, while 11 percent of American investors report that they personally lost money as a result of fraud.

FINRA notes that the rate of investment fraud is most likely much higher than it is reported. This is because many victims of financial advisor scams are too ashamed to come forward. Further, the study also found that a significant number of investors do not know how to spot common red flags of investment fraud. The least you should do is share your experience with other potential victims of investment scams.

Previous Associations

Under federal securities law and securities industry regulations, registered investment firms have a legal duty to supervise their financial advisors. Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 makes a securities firm liable for the conduct of representatives.

• NEXT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. (CRD#: 46214) :: 4/24/2009 – 9/1/2017 :: WILLIAMSVILLE, NY
• NEXT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. (CRD#: 46214) :: 5/1/2007 – 4/23/2009 :: WILLIAMSVILLE, NY
• BANC OF AMERICA INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 16361) :: 10/20/2004 – 5/1/2007 :: BUFFALO, NY
• QUICK & REILLY, INC. (CRD#: 11217) :: 9/5/2002 – 10/20/2004 :: NEW YORK, NY
• WACHOVIA SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 19616) :: 10/1/2000 – 8/26/2002 :: ST. LOUIS, MO
• FIRST UNION BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 8112) :: 6/23/2000 – 10/1/2000 :: CHARLOTTE, NC
• CITICORP INVESTMENT SERVICES (CRD#: 23988) :: 12/21/1998 – 6/6/2000 :: LONG ISLAND CITY, NY
• FIRST UNION BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 8112) :: 1/1/1996 – 12/9/1998 :: CHARLOTTE, NC
• MARKETING ONE SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 16611) :: 9/19/1995 – 1/2/1996 :: PORTLAND, OR
• CHEMICAL INVESTMENT SERVICES CORP. (CRD#: 36312) :: 8/1/1994 – 9/20/1995
• LIBERTY SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 14416) :: 5/17/1994 – 8/1/1994 :: PURCHASE, NY
• MONY SECURITIES CORP. (CRD#: 4386) :: 4/13/1994 – 5/19/1994 :: NEW YORK, NY
• GNA SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 10465) :: 4/5/1993 – 4/19/1994 :: RICHMOND, VA
• LIBERTY SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 14416) :: 2/2/1993 – 4/6/1993 :: PURCHASE, NY
• GNA SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 10465) :: 9/17/1990 – 2/2/1993 :: RICHMOND, VA
• LANDMARK BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 20221) :: 4/25/1990 – 9/14/1990
• H. C. COPELAND AND ASSOCIATES EQUITIES, INC. (CRD#: 7447) :: 9/29/1989 – 4/7/1990 :: SOMERSET, NJ
• FIRST INVESTORS CORPORATION (CRD#: 305) :: 4/27/1989 – 8/31/1989 :: EDISON, NJ

The duty to supervise securities representatives is a strong legal requirement. Registered investment firms must take many different steps to ensure that they are protecting their customers from irresponsible and criminal financial advisors.

Legit or Not?

Unfortunately, stockbroker fraud is more common than many investors would like to think. And yes, stockbrokers (including Frank Tae Kim, but not limited to)  can (and do) steal money from their clients. While it’s rare that a broker will literally steal his client’s money (though that does happen), typically the “theft” of investment funds comes in the form of other fraudulent violations of securities law and FINRA rules which leads to significant investment losses.

Investors generally understand that there are risks associated with buying and selling securities. The market can go up, and the market can go down. No matter how skilled of an investor you are, there are always risks. With that being said, sometimes investment losses cannot be blamed on simple back luck.

There are 10 major types of complaints we receive against Investment Brokers –

• Outright Theft (Conversion of Funds)
• Unauthorized Trading
• Misrepresentation or Omission of Material Facts
• Excessive Trading (Churning)
• Lack of Diversification
• Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
• Failure to Disclose a Personal Conflict of Interest
• Front Running of Transactions
• Breakpoint Sale Violations
• Negligent Portfolio Management

Do your due diligence before investing. Public records are available for everybody to review and decide on the safest bet. 

How to Protect Yourself

We, as citizens, place a great deal of trust in the financial advisors who are tasked with helping us achieve and maintain financial security. Most of the time financial advisors and stockbrokers are honest folks who work diligently in their client’s best interests. However, on occasion financial advisors and the brokerage firms who employ them mess up and cause serious financial harm to their clients. Sometimes these losses are caused by simple negligence. Other times fraud or other serious misconduct is to blame.

Here are 5 signs that your broker needs to be reported –

• Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, certain investment professionals, known as registered investment advisors (RIAs), owe fiduciary obligations to their customers. Your investment broker must always look out for your best interests. If you lost money because of your broker’s breach of fiduciary duty, you may be entitled to compensation for the full value of your damages.
• Unsuitable Investments: Many financial advisors are not fiduciaries. Instead, they are held to the suitability standard. These stockbrokers and financial advisors can only sell and recommend financial products that are appropriate for a customer’s unique investment profile. If you lost money in unsuitable investments, you should consider reporting them.
• Material Misrepresentations or Omissions: Brokers have a duty to make fair and honest representations to their clients. If they fail to do so, and an investor loses money due to a misrepresentation or a material omission, the broker may be liable for the investor’s losses.
• Lack of Diversification: Brokers must also act with the appropriate level of professional skill. Pushing a customer into over-concentrated investments is highly risky. Brokers can be held liable for losses sustained because of an investor’s inappropriate lack of diversification.
• Excessive Trading (Churning): Stockbrokers and financial advisors must have a well-grounded, reasonable basis to execute all trades. Unfortunately, there are cases in which brokers will frequently trade on a customer’s account, simply to increase their own fees. This unlawful practice is known as churning.
• Unauthorized Trading: Brokers must have the proper legal authority to make transactions on behalf of a client. If you lost money because your broker made trades that you never approved of, you may have been the victim of unauthorized trading. You should consult with an experienced attorney.

Report Frank Kim

In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.

Frank Tae Kim – and the firm that employs this broker – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). FINRA provides an online form to allow investors to file a formal complaint against their financial advisor, stockbroker, or brokerage firm.

Click here to go to FINRA’s Online Complaint Form →

This form will ask you for specific information related to your complaint. Be prepared by gathering the following:

• Name and symbol for the investment product in question.
• The CRD number (1946186) for the broker – Frank Tae Kim
• Your complete contact information.

Remember, it is advised to report your broker to FINRA, only after you have exhausted all of your other remedies and carefully prepared a compelling complaint.  Once you file a complaint against your broker at FINRA, your case will be bound by FINRA’s rules and the arbitration panel’s eventual decision. The time clock will start, and your complaint will be served on your broker or broker-dealer.

The views and opinions expressed in these articles are those of the source BrokerComplaints.com and do not necessarily reflect the official position of ‘Ripoff Repairs LLC,’ which shall not be held liable for any inaccuracies presented. The information provided within this article is for general informational purposes only. While we try to keep the information up-to-date and correct, there are no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability of the information in this article for any purpose.

This article is syndicated automatically through a third-party agency from BrokerComplaints.com.

To view the original article at BrokerComplaints.com, you can visit https://brokercomplaints.com/report/frank-tae-kim/.