Juan Enrique Palacios Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Juan Enrique Palacios  – 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 Juan Enrique Palacios.

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

About Juan Palacios

Juan Enrique Palacios is an Investment Adviser. Juan Enrique Palacios’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 4413334 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/4413334.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Juan Enrique Palacios.

Juan Enrique Palacios 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 Juan Enrique Palacios’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 10/3/2013
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Denied
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: THE CUSTOMER ALLEGES IN A WRITTEN COMPLAINT THAT THE RR DID NOT DISCLOSE TO THE CUSTOMER, THE CREDIT RATING OF THE BOND RECOMMENDED. THE CUSTOMER ALSO ALLEGES THAT THE RR DID NOT DISCLOSE THE EXPECTED DOWNGRADE OF CREDIT RATING FOR THE REFERENCED BOND, ANNOUNCED BY A CREDIT RATING AGENCY CONTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH THE REFERENCED SOLICITATION / TRANSACTION. ON JANUARY 10, 2014 A NEW LETTER WAS RECEIVED FROM THE CLIENT, IN RESPONSE TO THE LETTER SENT BY THE FIRM. IN THE LETTER THE CLIENT ALLEGES THAT THE TRADE WAS NOT AUTHORIZED BY HIM.
• Damage Amount Requested: $18,243.00
• Broker Comment: THE FIRM’S ONGOING INVESTIGATION OF THE MATTER, HAS DETERMINED THAT NO MISREPRESENTATION OCCURRED. THE RR DISCLOSED ALL THE PERTINENT INFORMATION RELATED TO THE BOND IN QUESTION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE SURROUNDING RISKS AND CREDIT RATING OF THE BOND AT THE TIME OF THE RECOMMENDATION. THE FIRM ALSO DISCLOSED TO THE CLIENT , THE CREDIT RATING OF THE BOND CONTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE TRANSACTION THROUGH A WRITTEN CONFIRMATION. THE FIRM WAS ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT THE TRANSACTION WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE CLIENT. THE FIRM HAS AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION OF ALL CUSTOMER’S ALLEGATIONS. 04/14/2014 THE FIRM HAS INVESTIGATED THE MATTER, AND DETERMINED THAT NO MISREPRESENTATION OCCURRED. THE RR DISCLOSED ALL PERTINENT INFORMATION RELATED TO THE BOND IN QUESTION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CREDIT RATING OF THE BOND AT THE TIME OF THE RECOMMENDATION. THE FIRM ALSO DISCLOSED TO THE CLIENT, THE CREDIT RATING OF THE BOND CONTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE TRANSACTION THROUGH A WRITTEN CONFIRMATION. ALTHOUGH THERE WAS A EGATIVE OUTLOOK CONCERNING THE BOND RELEASED BY A CREDIT RATING AGENCY, THAT DETERMINATION WAS NOT SHARED BY OTHER CREDIT AGENCIES, ONE OF WHICH DETERMINED THAT THE OUTLOOK FOR THE BOND WAS STABLE AT THE MOMENT OF THE RECOMMENDATION. MOREOVER, THE MARKET PRICE OF THE BOND ALREADY REFLECTED SUCH INFORMATION AT THE MOMENT OF RECOMMENDATION. MORE IMPORTANTLY, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION CLIENT’S RISK PROFILE, HIS STATED OBJECTIVE OF ACHIEVING HIGHER RETURNS, AND HIS INVESTMENT KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR HISTORY OF INVESTING IN INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS THE BOND, THE FIRM UNDERSTANDS THAT THE BOND WAS A SUITABLE INVESTMENT FOR THE CLIENT AT THE TIME OF RECOMMENDATION. IN REGARDS TO THE UNAUTHORIZED TRADE ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM INVESTIGATED AND CONCLUDED THAT NO UNAUTHORIZED TRADING OCCURRED; THE EXECUTION WAS CONFIRMED THROUGH A WRITTEN CONFIRMATION MAILED TO THE CLIENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PERTINENT REGULATORY PROVISIONS, AND MONTHLY ACCOUNT STATEMENTS WERE MAILED TO THE CLIENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECURITIES LAW. IN ADDITION, THE RR AND THE CLIENT HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS AFTER THE PRODUCT WAS PURCHASED, IN REGARDS THE PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE; DURING THESE REVIEWS, THE PRODUCT WAS DISCUSSED AND THE CLIENT NEVER INFORMED THAT THE TRADE HAS NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED BY HIM. ACCORDINGLY, CLIENT’S CLAIM HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE FIRM.

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.

• CITI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC (CRD#: 17053) :: 12/15/2010 – 4/27/2021 :: SANTIAGO
• CITICORP FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION (CRD#: 17053) :: 6/21/2001 – 6/27/2006 :: SAN JUAN, PR

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 Juan Enrique Palacios, 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 Juan Palacios

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

Juan Enrique Palacios – 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 (4413334) for the broker – Juan Enrique Palacios
• 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/juan-enrique-palacios/.