FINRA Disciplinary Actions May 2021

This post is written on behalf of Girard Bengali, APC.

FINRA Disciplinary Actions May 2021

CANDIDO JOSE VIYELLA (CRD #1829255 , MIAMI, FLORIDA)

May 10, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Viyella was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Viyella consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide on-the-record testimony requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Viyella was under investigation regarding accusations that he participated in private securities transactions without notifying his member firm when he failed to appear. (FINRA Case #2019064630801)

FRANCISCO WILLIAM CORONEL (CRD #5001727, VENTURA, CALIFORNIA)

May 10, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Coronel was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Coronel consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide documents and information as requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Coronel was under investigation regarding claims made in a U5 filed by his member firm, including issues related to the processing of property and casualty insurance premium payments, when he refused to provide information. (FINRA Case #2021070234801)

JOHN EDGAR SIMMONS JR. (CRD #4878890 , GULF BREEZE, FLORIDA)

May 10, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Simmons was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Simmons consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide documents and information as requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Simmons was under investigation regarding a U5 filed by his member firm, which stated Simmons had been terminated for involvement in a private securities transaction without providing his firm with notice, when he failed to provide information. (FINRA Case #2019064630801)

WILLIAM HERMAN DIXON (CRD #68881, URBANA, OHIO)

May 11, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Dixon was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Dixon consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide documents as requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Dixon being investigated for allegations made by his member firm in a U5 that he violated the firm’s policies and procedures regarding the use of non-genuine client signatures when he failed to provide documents. (FINRA Case #2019064188001)

ERIC JOHN VICI (CRD #6114866, MELBOURNE, FLORIDA)

May 14, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Vici was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Vici consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to provide on-the-record testimony as requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Vici being investigated for allegations made the executor of one of his customers’ estates that he mishandled their funds when he failed to provide testimony. (FINRA Case #2019064188001)

CHANDER KETU GOEL (CRD #4588999, NEW YORK, NEW YORK)

May 18, 2021 – An AWC was issued in which Goel was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Without admitting or denying the findings, Goel consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that he refused to appear for on-the-record testimony as requested by FINRA during the course of an investigation. The findings stated that Goel was under investigation for potential inappropriate traditional insurance sales practices when he failed to appear. (FINRA Case #2019064407601)

MERCER HICKS III (CRD #245170, CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA)

May 19, 2021 – An OHO decision became final in which Hicks was barred from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. The sanction was based on findings that Hicks recommended high-risk, illiquid investments to five senior customers without a reasonable basis to believe the investments were suitable for anyone, ignoring his reasonable-basis suitability obligations. The findings stated that Hicks failed to understand the nature of the REITs and the company which he was recommending and did not do his due diligence on the subject. (FINRA Case #2017052867301)

related Posts

Scroll to Top