A National Securities Arbitration & Investment Fraud Law Firm

$70 MILLION Recovery for Investment Fraud
$44 MILLION Recovery for Ponzi Scheme Victims
$25 MILLION Recovery Against National Brokerage Firm
$9.1 MILLION FINRA Arbitration Award Against Brokerage Firm
$7.9 MILLION Securities Arbitration Award Against Stockbroker
$1 MILLION Securities Arbitration Award for Elder Financial Fraud
American Association for Jusice
Florida Legal Elite 2011
Legal Leaders
5th Annual Most Effective Lawyers 2009
Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum
Super-Lawyers
SFLG
Top 100
Public Justice

|

As a Securities and Exchange Commission report found, options trading is highly technical and involves holding stocks for short periods of time. Given the complexity of these deals, customers frequently depend on their brokers to make almost all of their trading decisions. Unscrupulous brokers know this, and they use their customers’ reliance for churning—when a broker engages in excessive trading on customers’ behalf to generate more commissions. But churning is illegal, and brokers who have engaged in churning can be required to compensate their clients for related losses. Because customers rely so heavily upon brokers for options trades, brokers have additional requirements for making these trades. For example, they must know the customers’ financial position, their investment goals, and their age. And customers must understand the risks of options training. But it isn’t enough for them to understand that options trading is risky, generally speaking. The brokers should explain the risks of each specific deal. And they should weigh if their customers understand the trade and have the financial wherewithal to make it, before the trade.As a Securities and Exchange Commission report found, options trading is highly technical and involves holding stocks for short periods of time. Given the complexity of these deals, customers frequently depend on their brokers to make almost all of their trading decisions. Unscrupulous brokers know this, and they use their customers’ reliance for churning—when a broker engages in excessive trading on customers’ behalf to generate more commissions. But churning is illegal, and brokers who have engaged in churning can be required to compensate their clients for related losses. Continue reading ›

|

While some view “covered call” trading as one of the forms of options trading that have the least risk, the reality is that covered call options still come with some serious risk. A covered call strategy also requires extensive trading and allows brokers to change commissions or other fees making these strategies very expensive. And it’s important to understand that if your broker has convinced you to follow a covered calls options strategy that resulted in investment losses, the broker may be liable to compensate you for those losses. Pros and Cons of a Covered Call Options Trade In a covered call options trade, Person A purchases stocks and then sells an option to sell the shares to Person B, once the shares have risen to a specified price. At that point, it’s up to Person B if they will purchase the shares or not. If the shares increase in value, Person A will profit from the increased value in the shares, whether they sell them to Person B or not. However, it’s possible that Person A would have done better if they’d held the stock for a longer investment, when the agreement will force them to sell at that price.While some view “covered call” trading as one of the forms of options trading that have the least risk, the reality is that covered call options still come with some serious risk. A covered call strategy also requires extensive trading and allows brokers to change commissions or other fees making these strategies very expensive. And it’s important to understand that if your broker has convinced you to follow a covered calls options strategy that resulted in investment losses, the broker may be liable to compensate you for those losses. Continue reading ›

|

Silver Law Group’s managing partner Scott Silver has recently been awarded the designation of an America’s 100 High Stakes Litigator for the Southern Florida region. Every year, America’s Top 100 recognizes 100 attorneys in each state and highlighting their accomplishments. Using a proprietary selection methodology, along with specific criteria, the organization seeks out attorneys throughout the US for their exceptional work in their chosen field of law. A high-stakes litigator is one who has: Litigated a case worth at least $2M, either for a plaintiff or a defendant, or Litigated a case involving a business with an outcome worth at least $2M The attorney is initially nominated by a peer or through third-party research and is by invitation-only. Once selected, the candidates are vetted through the organization’s criteria and algorithms to determine their eligibility. Additional criteria include:Silver Law Group’s managing partner Scott Silver has recently been awarded the designation of an America’s 100 High Stakes Litigator for the Southern Florida region.

Every year, America’s Top 100 recognizes 100 attorneys in each state and highlighting their accomplishments. Using a proprietary selection methodology, along with specific criteria, the organization seeks out attorneys throughout the US for their exceptional work in their chosen field of law. Continue reading ›

|

FINRA’s arbitration process has an increased focus after a recent court ruling found that the process wasn’t entirely as neutral as the agency claims. In February, two former Wells Fargo customers won a court decision against Wells Fargo that ruled the bank had been involved in subtle manipulation of FINRA’s arbitration process. The customer showed in court that a Wells Fargo attorney had a “secret agreement” with FINRA to keep plaintiff-friendly arbitrators out of his cases to increase his chances of winning. His increased wins saw customers lose their cases due to an unfair advantage. Wells Fargo is now appealing the decision. Now increased scrutiny on FINRA and its alleged neutrality has also called into question their entire dispute resolution process.FINRA’s arbitration process has an increased focus after a recent court ruling found that the process wasn’t entirely as neutral as the agency claims.

In February, two former Wells Fargo customers won a court decision against Wells Fargo that ruled the bank had been involved in subtle manipulation of FINRA’s arbitration process. The customer showed in court that a Wells Fargo attorney had a “secret agreement” with FINRA to keep plaintiff-friendly arbitrators out of his cases to increase his chances of winning. His increased wins saw customers lose their cases due to an unfair advantage. Wells Fargo is now appealing the decision. Continue reading ›

|

Wells Fargo and its counsel were found to have manipulated the FINRA arbitration process, according to a Georgia state court, which in January, 2022 vacated an arbitration award in favor of Wells Fargo. The Public Investors Advocate Bar Association (PIABA) and its president called for an investigation by the SEC as well as Congressional hearings. FINRA Dispute Resolution Investors who have disputes with their FINRA-registered broker-dealers are required to use FINRA’s Dispute Resolution forum. Disputes are resolved through non-judicial arbitration and mediation proceedings. Investors frequently bring FINRA arbitration claims after losing money with investments sold to them by their broker-dealer, claiming the investments were unsuitable, that adequate due diligence wasn’t preformed, or other causes. Arbitration is typically faster and less expensive than court.Wells Fargo and its counsel were found to have manipulated the FINRA arbitration process, according to a Georgia state court, which in January, 2022 vacated an arbitration award in favor of Wells Fargo. The Public Investors Advocate Bar Association (PIABA) and its president called for an investigation by the SEC as well as Congressional hearings. Continue reading ›

|

Terms of a recent letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) that Aegis Capital Corp. submitted to FINRA require the New York-based broker-dealer to repay customers for alleged rule violations related to churning or excessive trading in customer accounts. Aegis was also ordered to pay monetary sanctions, and the AWC settled the claims, and Aegis does not admit or deny FINRA’s findings.  The AWC states that restitution is to be paid to certain customers “in the total amount of $1,692,256.44.”Terms of a recent letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) that Aegis Capital Corp. submitted to FINRA require the New York-based broker-dealer to repay customers for alleged rule violations related to churning or excessive trading in customer accounts.

Aegis was also ordered to pay monetary sanctions, and the AWC settled the claims, and Aegis does not admit or deny FINRA’s findings. Continue reading ›

|

Christopher Bond (Christopher Edward Bond CRD# 4658534) is a registered broker and investment advisor currently employed with National Securities Corporation (CRD#: 7569) of Melville, NY. He was previously employed with Gunnallen Financial, Inc (CRD#:17609) of Tampa, FL and Ehrenkrantz King Nussbaum, Inc. (CRD#:113525, expelled by FINRA on 10/12/2012) of Melville, NY.  He has been in the industry since 2003. In a FINRA disciplinary action, Bond was discovered to have exercised discretions in four NSC customer brokerage accounts on 288 occasions without written authorization. While he did have their verbal permission, he also needed this permission in writing, in accordance with FINRA Rules 3260(b) and 2010.Christopher Bond (Christopher Edward Bond CRD# 4658534) is a registered broker and investment advisor currently employed with National Securities Corporation (CRD#: 7569) of Melville, NY. He was previously employed with Gunnallen Financial, Inc (CRD#:17609) of Tampa, FL and Ehrenkrantz King Nussbaum, Inc. (CRD#:113525, expelled by FINRA on 10/12/2012) of Melville, NY.  He has been in the industry since 2003. Continue reading ›

|

GWG L Bonds are a relatively new financial product that purportedly offers higher yields than typical publicly-traded, fixed-income bonds. These bonds have significant risk and are not like traditional corporate bonds and other conservative investments. Silver Law Group has been retained by investors to pursue securities arbitration claims against brokerage firms who recommended GWG bonds alleging that the brokerage firms due diligence was negligent, material risks were not properly disclosed or materially misrepresented to them or their account was improperly concentrated in GWG bonds and other illiquid alternative investments. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
Main Office
11780 W Sample Rd
Coral Springs, FL 33065
Phone: (954) 755-4799Fax: (954) 755-4684
New York Office
229 W 36th St 8th Floor
New York, NY 10018
Phone: (212) 377-5227
Florida Office
4755 Technology Way #205
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Phone: (561) 665-8613
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

Visit our Florida Securities Whistleblower Website

We serve clients nationwide including, but not limited to, those in the following localities: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas–Fort Worth, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Bernardino-Riverside, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, Tampa–St. Petersburg, and Washington, D.C. View More

California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Opt-Out IconYour Privacy Choices Cookie Policy Manage Cookies

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Silver Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design