Silver Law Group is investigating various commissions, markups and fees charged by Titan Securities and COR Clearing. Our investigation reveals that many investors were charged an additional fixed commission plus various other charges on trades made through COR Clearing.
The SEC requires fees your broker charges you to be fair and reasonable. However, exactly what’s fair is not always clearly defined. Fees impact your return and can reduce your return on investments and can have a significant impact on the overall return of your investments over time.
Several years ago, FINRA fined several broker-dealers for mischaracterizing a portion of the commission charges as fees for handling services. No matter what the fee is for, over time, a markup, commission fee or charge can have a dramatic impact on a portfolio.If You’ve Invested With Titan Securities
If you suffered significant financial losses with Titan Securities, you may have a claim for your investment losses. Silver Law Group has significant experience pursuing claims against broker-dealers including Titan Securities through FINRA or securities arbitration as well as class action lawsuits against issuers and other potential third parties.
Silver Law Group is a nationally-recognized securities law firm headquartered in South Florida representing investors worldwide with their claims for losses due to securities and investment fraud. The firm has successfully recovered multi-million dollar awards for its clients through securities arbitration and the courts. To contactScott L. Silver to discuss your legal matter, call toll-free (800) 975-4345 or e-mail him at SSilver@silverlaw.com.
* Titan Securities, the American brokerage firm and investment advisory firm, is different from the Australian investment and stock market research firm called Titan Securities.Titan Securities Disclosures
Titan Securities has 4 disclosures on its publicly-available FINRA BrokerCheck report:
In April, 2019, a disclosure initiated by the California Department of Business Oversight alleged that “investment adviser submitted an online examination after a deadline imposed by the commissioner, in violation of Cal. Corp. sec. 25241.” A $2,500 administrative penalty was assessed.
In January, 2019, a civil disclosure alleged “breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, violations of Missouri Merchandising Practices Act regarding FIP purchase from Vantramp Family Trust.” Monetary damages were sought, and the case is pending as of this writing.
In October, 2016, a regulatory disclosure alleged “The firm was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that it, acting through its CCO, failed to adequately supervise a registered representative’s OBA. The complaint alleges that in connection with a review of the representative’s email correspondence, the CCO identified red flags indicating that representative was possibly engaged in an undisclosed OBS in connection with the company….” In 2019, the case was resolved and a monetary fine of $65,000 was assessed.
In May, 2009, a disclosure initiated by FINRA alleged that the firm, acting through its principal “commenced a “minimum-maximum” offering conducted by a company” and “failed to ensure that investor funds from both offerings were deposited into qualified escrow accounts.” A fine of $7,000 was assessed.