Securities and Exchange Commission v. James A. Torchia et al., Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-03904-WSD (N.D. Ga., filed November 10, 2015)

SEC Announces Emergency Action to Halt Ongoing Investment Fraud Involving Promissory Notes and Life Settlement Contracts

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently announced the entry of a Consent Order (“Order”) halting an alleged ongoing investment fraud by James Torchia and various related entities involving the sale of promissory notes and life settlement contracts.

On November 10, 2015, the SEC filed an emergency civil action in federal court in Atlanta against Torchia, a resident of Canton, Georgia, and the following entities that he operates and controls: (i) Credit Nation Capital, LLC (formerly known as Credit Nation Lending, LLC) (“CN Capital”), a Georgia limited liability company in Woodstock Georgia; (ii) Credit Nation Acceptance, LLC (“CN Acceptance”), a Texas limited liability company in Midland, Texas; (iii) Credit Nation Auto Sales, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company in Woodstock, Georgia; (iv) American Motor Credit, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company in Woodstock, Georgia; and (v) Spaghetti Junction, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that since 2009, Torchia, through CN Capital, has raised tens of millions of dollars from investors who purchased unregistered promissory notes, most of which promised a 9% return. The complaint further alleges that CN Capital touts the safety of the promissory notes, describing them to investors as “100% asset backed” and “backed by hard assets dollar for dollar.” In reality, according to the complaint, CN Capital has generated substantial losses each year since at least 2011 and is insolvent. The SEC contends that contrary to representations made to investors portraying the notes as a secure investment capable of generating reliable investment returns, CN Capital basically operates as an ongoing Ponzi scheme through which the promised investment returns are paid using new investor money. The complaint alleges that neither CN Capital’s multi-million dollar per year operating losses nor its massive insolvency has ever been disclosed to investors.

The complaint also alleges that CN Acceptance sells unregistered fractional interests in life settlement contracts (“LS Interests”) to investors and that CN Acceptance promises to pay the policy premiums using a portion of the purchase price. But in practice, according to the complaint, Torchia disregards corporate formalities and commingles CN Acceptance’s funds with those of CN Capital, such that the LS Interests are now threatened by CN Capital’s Insolvency. The complaint further alleges that Torchia has transferred millions of dollars to entities he controls to support his and his family’s other businesses and to pay his personal expenses. According to the complaint, CN Capital and CN Acceptance, on average, have raised in excess of $2 million per month through the sale of notes and LS Interests in the first six months of 2015.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated and/or aided and abetted or caused violations of the antifraud provisions of the securities laws in Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint also alleges that Torchia, CN Capital and CN Acceptance violated the registration provisions of the securities laws in Section 5 of the Securities Act.

On November 20, 2015, the Court approved an Order by which the defendants agreed, among other things, not to offer or sell any additional promissory notes or to advertise investment opportunities via general solicitations. The Order also restricts the defendants’ ability to transfer assets and funds and to sell fractional interests in life settlements. A related evidentiary hearing will be held on January 7, 2016.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Boca Raton Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

SEC Charges Four Insurance Agents in Securities Fraud Targeting Elderly Investors

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced charges against four insurance agents for unlawfully selling securities in what turned out to be a multi-million dollar offering fraud targeting elderly investors.

The SEC previously charged a Colorado man who allegedly orchestrated the scheme and recruited active insurance agents to help him solicit investors in Colorado and several other states. The scheme raised approximately $4.3 million during a nearly 18-month period. The SEC’s investigation further found that the four insurance agents charged today solicited funds without registering with the SEC as a broker-dealer as required under the federal securities laws.

“When individuals act as a broker and sell securities to the public, they must comply with registration, supervision, and compliance requirements that exist to protect investors,” said Julie K. Lutz, Director of the SEC’s Denver Regional Office. “These insurance agents improperly operated outside of that regulatory framework and thereby placed their clients at risk.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings, the scheme primarily targeted retired annuity holders by using insurance agents to sell interests in a company called Arete LLC, which was controlled by the Colorado man orchestrating the scheme: Gary Snisky. The insurance agents told investors that their funds would be used by Snisky to purchase government-backed agency bonds at a discount. However, Snisky did not purchase bonds or conduct any such trading, and he misappropriated approximately $2.8 million of investor funds to pay commissions and make personal mortgage payments.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that the following three brokers raised approximately $1.5 million for Snisky and received almost $90,000 in commissions:

• Kenneth C. Meissner of Fair Oaks Branch, Texas
• James Doug Scott of Perkasie, Penn.
• Mark S. “Mike” Tomich of Belmont, Mich.

The other insurance agent – David C. Sorrells of Linden, Texas – entered into a cooperation agreement with the SEC. Without admitting or denying the findings, Sorrells consented to an order finding that he violated Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. He agreed to be barred from the securities industry, cease and desist from future violations of Section 15(a), and pay disgorgement of $207,213.34. He also is subject to an additional financial penalty. The settlement reflects substantial assistance that Sorrells provided in the SEC’s investigation.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that Meissner, Scott, and Tomich violated Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act, and is seeking disgorgement, penalties, and securities industry bars in the matter, which will be litigated before an administrative law judge. The SEC’s case against Snisky, filed in November 2013, is still pending in federal court in Colorado.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

An equity indexed annuity is a fixed annuity, either immediate or deferred, that earns interest or provides benefits that are linked to an external equity reference or an equity index. The value of the index might be tied to a stock or other equity index. One of the most commonly used indices is the Standard & Poors 500 Composite Stock Price Index, which is an equity index. The value of any index varies from day to day and is not predictable. When you buy an equity indexed annuity you own an insurance contract. You are not buying shares of any stock index.

Please keep in mind that the above information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as providing legal or investment advice. If you have any questions concerning the contents of this post, you should contract a qualified professional.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

There are a series of basic questions that you should ask your agent or company when considering deferred annuities. This list is not designed to be complete in all material respects. It is being provided as a general guide. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice.

• Is this a single premium or multiple premium contract?
• Is this an equity-indexed annuity?
• What is the initial interest rate and how long is it guaranteed:
• Does the initial rate include a bonus rate and how much is the bonus?
• What is the guaranteed minimum interest rate?
• What renewal rate is the company crediting on annuity contracts of the same type that were issues last year?
• Are there withdrawal or surrender charges or penaltiesp if you want to end your contract and take out all of you money? How much are they?
• Can you get a partial withdrawal without paying surrender or other charges or losing interest?
• Does you annuity waive withdrawal charges for reasons such as dealth, confinement in a nursing home or terminal illness?
• Is there a market value adjustment (MVA) provision in your annuity?
• What other charges, if any, may be deducted from you premium or contract value?
• If you pick a shorter or longer payout period or surrender the annuity, will the accumulated value or the way interest is credited change?
• Is there a death benefit: How is it set: Can you change it?
• What income payment options can you choose?
• Once you choose a payment option, can it be changed?

While the above questions are important for anyone considering the purchase of an annuity to ask, these questions are much more important for seniors and retirees. As individuals get older, the pontential that they will need to access their capital for emergencies increases.

Before you decide to buy, exchange or close an annuity, you should review the contract terms and conditions very carefully as the terms of each annuity contract vary. Remember that taking money out of an annuity may mean you must pay taxes.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

FAQs – Annuity:

An annuity is a contract in which an insurance company makes a series of income payments at regular intervals in return for a premium or premiums you have paid. Annuities are most often bought for future retirement income. Only an annuity can pay an income stream that can be guaranteed to last as long as you live.

An annuity is neither a life insurance nor a health insurance policy. It’s not a savings account or a savings certificate. You shouldn’t buy an annuity to reach short-term financial goals.

Your value in an annuity contract is the premiums you have paid, less any applicable charges, plus interest credited. The insurance company uses the value to figure the amount of most of the benefits that you can choose to receive from an annuity contract.

A deferred annuity has two parts or periods. During the accumulation period, the money you put into the annuity, less an applicable charges, earns interest. The earnings grow tax-deferred as long as you leave them in the annuity. During the second period, call the payout period, the company pays income to you or to someone you choose.

Please keep in mind that this information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If the reader has any quesitons relative to the contents of this post or relative to a unique situation that they are experiencing concerning themselves or a elder relative, you should contact a qualified professional immediately.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

SEC Announces Charges Against Brokers, Adviser, and Others Involved in Variable Annuities Scheme to Profit From Terminally Ill

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced enforcement actions against a pair of brokers, an investment advisory firm, and several others involved in a variable annuities scheme to profit from the imminent deaths of terminally ill patients in nursing homes and hospice care.

Variable annuities are designed to serve as long-term investment vehicles, typically to provide income at retirement. Common features are a death benefit paid to the annuity’s beneficiary (typically a spouse or child) if the annuitant dies, and a bonus credit that the annuity issuer adds to the contract value based on a specified percentage of purchase payments. The SEC Enforcement Division alleges that Michael A. Horowitz, a broker who lives in Los Angeles, developed an illicit strategy to exploit these benefits. He recruited others to help him obtain personal health and identifying information of terminally ill patients in southern California and Chicago. Anticipating they would soon die, Horowitz sold variable annuities contracts with death benefit and bonus credit features to wealthy investors, and he designated the patients as annuitants whose death would trigger a benefit payout. Horowitz marketed these annuities as opportunities for investors to reap short-term investment gains. When the annuitants died, the investors collected death benefit payouts.

The SEC Enforcement Division alleges that Horowitz enlisted another broker Moshe Marc Cohen of Brooklyn, N.Y., and they each deceived their own brokerage firms to obtain the approvals they needed to sell the annuities. They falsified various broker-dealer forms used by firms to conduct investment suitability reviews. As a result of the fraudulent practices used in the scheme, some insurance companies unwittingly issued variable annuities that they would not otherwise have sold. Horowitz and Cohen, meanwhile, generated more than $1 million in sales commissions.

Agreeing to settle the SEC’s charges are four non-brokers and a New York-based investment advisory firm recruited into the scheme. Also agreeing to settlements are two other brokers who are charged with causing books-and-records violations related to annuities sold through the scheme. A combined total of more than $4.5 million will be paid in the settlements. The SEC’s litigation continues against Horowitz and Cohen.

“This was a calculated fraud exploiting terminally ill patients,” said Julie M. Riewe, co-chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit. “Michael Horowitz and others stole their most private information for personal monetary gain.”

According to the SEC’s orders instituting administrative proceedings, the scheme began in 2007 and continued into 2008. Horowitz agreed to compensate Harold Ten of Los Angeles and Menachem “Mark” Berger of Chicago for identifying terminally ill patients to be used as annuitants. Berger, in turn, recruited Debra Flowers of Chicago into the scheme and compensated her directly. Through the use of a purported charity and other forms of deception, Ten, Berger, and Flowers obtained confidential health data about patients for Horowitz.

According to the SEC’s orders, after selling millions of dollars in variable annuities to individual investors, Horowitz still desired to generate greater capital into the scheme. Searching for a large source of financing, he began pitching his scheme to institutional investors. A pooled investment vehicle and its adviser BDL Manager LLC were created in late 2007 in order to facilitate institutional investment in variable annuities through the use of nominees. Commodities trader Howard Feder, who lives in Woodmere, N.Y., became each firm’s sole principal. Feder and BDL Manager fraudulently secured broker-dealer approvals of more than $56 million in annuities sold through Horowitz’s scheme. Feder furnished the brokers with blank forms signed by the nominees enabling the brokers to complete the forms with false statements indicating that the nominees did not intend to access their investments for many years. Feder understood that the purpose of Horowitz’s scheme was to designate terminally ill patients as annuitants in the expectation that their deaths would result in short-term lucrative payouts. BDL Group received more than $1.5 million in proceeds from its investment in the annuities.

The order against Horowitz and Cohen alleges that they willfully violated the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and they willfully aided and abetted and caused violations of the Exchange Act’s books-and-records provisions. Horowitz also acted as an unregistered broker.

Ten, Berger, Flowers, Feder, and BDL Manager consented to SEC orders finding that they willfully violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5. They neither admitted nor denied the findings and agreed to cease and desist from future violations. The individuals agreed to securities industry or penny stock bars as well as the following monetary sanctions:

• Ten agreed to pay disgorgement of $181,147.64, prejudgment interest of $20,858.80, and a penalty of $90,000.
• Berger agreed to pay disgorgement of $119,000, prejudgment interest of $11,579.61, and a penalty of $100,000.
• Feder agreed to pay a penalty of $130,000.
• BDL Manager agreed to pay disgorgement of $1,550,565.55, prejudgment interest of $196,608.97, and a penalty of $1,550,565.55.

The SEC’s order against Richard Horowitz and Marc Firestone finds that they negligently allowed point-of-sale forms for 12 annuities in the scheme to be submitted to their firm with inaccurately overstated answers to the form’s question asking how soon the customer intended to access his or her investment. These inaccurate answers led to each annuity’s issuance, and Horowitz and Firestone were each paid commissions.

Richard Horowitz and Firestone consented to the order finding that they caused their firm to violate Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 17a-3. Without admitting or denying the findings, they agreed to cease and desist from committing or causing future violations of those provisions as well as the following monetary sanctions:

• Horowitz agreed to pay disgorgement of $292,767.89, prejudgment interest of $36,512.20, and a penalty of $40,800.
• Firestone agreed to pay disgorgement of $127,853.20, prejudgment interest of $17,140.89, and a penalty of $40,800.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) is a self-regulatory authority assigned the responsibility, by the Securities and Exchange Commission, to license, regulate and discipline securities broker/dealers and their employees, including account executives. In the event that FINRA elects to institute an enforcement action, firms and licensed individuals have the responsibility to reflect such action on their U-4 and/or U-5 filings, which can be viewed on the FINRA website under the broker-check section of the site or by viewing the monthly disciplinary information also provided on the FINRA site.

The monthly disciplinary information is referenced on the FINRA site generally in alphabetical order. This post relates to the following company or individuals. If the reader would like to review the entire FINRA release or the broker-check information concerning this matter, you can follow these highlighted links:

January 2014 Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions

Broker Check: http://www.finra.org/Investors/ToolsCalculators/BrokerCheck/

Timothy John Coyle (CDR #2437046, Registered Representative, Palm Harbor, Florida) submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent in which he was fined $5,000 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for six months. The fine must be paid either immediately upon Coyle’s reassociation with a FINRA member firm following his suspension, or prior to the filing of any application or request for relief from any statutory disqualification, whichever is earlier. Without admitting or denying the findings, Coyle consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that he forged signatures on documents and also forged customer’s initials next to amendments to a variable annuity application. The findings stated that the customer signatures and initials Coyle forged were done without the customer’ knowledge or consent. FINRA Case No. 2012031517302

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) is a self-regulatory authority assigned the responsibility, by the Securities and Exchange Commission, to license, regulate and discipline securities broker/dealers and their employees, including account executives. In the event that FINRA elects to institute an enforcement action, firms and licensed individuals have the responsibility to reflect such action on their U-4 and/or U-5 filings, which can be viewed on the FINRA website under the broker-check section of the site or by viewing the monthly disciplinary information also provided on the FINRA site.

The monthly disciplinary information is referenced on the FINRA site generally in alphabetical order. This post relates to the following company or individuals. If the reader would like to review the entire FINRA release or the broker-check information concerning this matter, you can follow these highlighted links:

January 2014 Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions

Broker Check: http://www.finra.org/Investors/ToolsCalculators/BrokerCheck/

Rinnie KF Chan (CRD #4225956, Registered Representative, Edison, New Jersey) submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Wavier and Consent in which she was fined $5,000 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for one month. The fine must be paid either immediately upon Chan’s reassociation with a FINRA member firm following her suspension, or prior to the filing of any application or request for relief from any statutory disqualification, whichever is earlier. Without admitting or denying the findings, Chan consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that she sold fixed life insurance policies issued by a non-member firm-affiliated insurance company for which she was compensated approximately $69,000 in commissions. The findings stated that Chan did not submit the applications through the firm’s Enterprise General Agency or declare the sales to the firm as an outside business activity. In her annual attestation, Chan falsely certified to the firm that she had not been engaged in any outside business activities, except for those previously disclosed. FINRA Case No. 2011030533101

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

Extent of Elder Abuse Victimization:

We have been focusing recently or our website, www.forkeylaw.com and on this blog about various issues relating to elder, senior and retirement financial abuse and exploitation. This post is designed to provide some statistics which reflect the growing problems in this area of senior life.

It goes without saying that financial elder and senior financial abuse and exploitation is on the rise. Financial abuse and exploitation takes on many forms. As indicated in many posts that we have made, the first line of defense, assuming that they are not committing the abuse, to help prevent and protect elders, are family members, healthcare providers, friends and professionals such as certified public accountants, financial advisors and attorneys. The time to look the other way or not to get involved is long past. The overall emotional and monetary impact of elder abuse and exploitation is devastating in ways that can’t be imagined.

The National Institute of Justice funded a 2013 report based upon research done by Shelly L. Jackson, PH.D., and Thomas L. Hafemeister, J.D., PH.D called Understanding Elder Abuse, New Directions for Developing Theories of Elder Abuse Occurring in Domestic Settings. As noted in the report, which was based on 2010 statistics, 13 percent of the population was age 65 and older, with this group expected to comprise 19.3 percent of the population by 2030. Elder abuse among this population is both a pervasive problem and a growing concern. Given that the vast majority (96.9 percent) of older Americans are residing in domestic settings, it is not surprising that the majority (89.3 percent) of elder abuse reported to Adult Protective Services (APS) occurs in domestic settings.

Within this subset, the report provided the following statistics on the prevalence of elder mistreatment victimization:

• Eleven percent of elders reported experiencing at least one form of mistreatment – emotional, physical, sexual or potential neglect – in the past year.
• Past-year prevalence was 5.1 percent for emotional mistreatment, 1.6 percent for physical mistreatment, 0.6 percent for sexual mistreatment and 5.1 percent for potential neglect.
• Financial exploitation by a family member in the past year was reported by 5.2 percent of elders.
• The risk of elder mistreatment is higher for individuals with the following characteristics: low household income, unemployed or retired, reporting poor health, having experienced a prior traumatic event or reporting low levels of social support.

A section of the report focused specifically on the financial exploitation of the elderly. As we all know, financial exploitation of elders is complex and, in some instances, accompanied by other forms of elder mistreatment.

The report noted that the United States has no national reporting mechanism to track the financial exploitation of elders, but a 1998 study by the National Center on Elder Abuse, found that financial abuse accounted for about 12 percent of all elder abuse reported nationally in 1993 and 1994 and 30 percent of substantiated elder abuse reported submitted to Adult Protective Services in 1996 after excluding reports of self-neglect.

The report went on to note that a 2000 survey of the National Association of Adult Protective Services Administrators conducted for the National Center on Elder Abuse found that financial exploitation comprised 13 percent of the mistreatment allegations investigated. However, many experts in the field believe that the level of elder exploitation may well exceed what has been reported to authorities and documented by researchers. A proposition with which we agree based upon the number of financial abuse cases we have been involved in.

In the report, the researchers examined two general types of financial exploitation: (a) cases where an elderly person was the victim solely of financial exploitation and (b) cases where an elderly person was the victim of both financial exploitation and neglect or physical abuse. This latter type of abuse is referred to as hybrid financial exploitation.

In arriving at their findings, the researchers examined data from all adult protective services cases in Virginia from 2005 to 2007 with victims aged 60 and older. They also conducted an in-depth assessment of 54 cases. The in-depth assessment included interviews with adult protective services caseworkers, victims, and a third party who knew the victim but was not involved in the case.

They found that the characteristics and dynamics of the two types of cases (pure financial exploitation and hybrid financial exploitation) vary depending on the type of exploitation involved.

The data revealed several differences between the two types of cases. Of the 54 cases studied in-depth, 38 were financial exploitation alone, and 16 were hybrid financial exploitation. The researchers identified two types of independence – physical and financial. Physically independent elders were able to care for themselves. They could drive, were cognitively intact and physically healthy. Financially independent elders had the financial assets to cover their needs and often owned their homes. Elderly victims who were physically and financially independent were more likely to experience pure financial exploitation.

Elderly victims experiencing hybrid financial exploitation (that is, financial exploitation along with abuse or neglect) tended to be financially independent but were physically dependent. They had significant health problems, were unable to drive and were to some degree dependent on others for assistance.

Victims of hybrid financial exploitation were more likely than victims of pure financial exploitation to have:

• Been victimized by a relative.
• Experienced abuse multiple times over a longer period of time (123 months vs. 32 months for victims of financial exploitation alone without neglect or abuse).
• Suffered a negative health consequence, financial loss, a disruption in social relationships, or some combination of these as a consequence of their victimization.

Based on the larger dataset of all reported cases in Virginia, the researchers identified a number of characteristics of the 472 victims of financial exploitation. These victims:

• Were independent. Independent elders were 66 percent more likely to experience pure financial exploitation (without accompanying neglect or abuse) than the victims who were dependent.
• Were not experiencing dementia or confusion. Elders who were not experiencing dementia or confusion were 29 percent more likely to experience pure financial exploitation than the victims who were experiencing dementia or confusion.
• Had abusers who were not overburdened in providing social support. Elders with abusers who perceived that they had reliable social support were 88 percent more likely to experience pure financial exploitation compared to victims with abusers with overburdened social support.

The researchers also found that the 162 victims of hybrid financial exploitation (financial exploitation plus neglect or abuse) were 81 percent more likely to experience hybrid exploitation when the abuser did not provide financial support to the victim, but the victim did provide financial support to the perpetrator.

If you are aware of issues that you believe constitute elder financial abuse and need some direction as to what you options are, please feel free to call us for your initial free consultation.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

Hybrid financial exploitation.

It has been determined that a relatively unrecognized situation, referred to as hybrid financial exploitation, arises when financial exploitation co-occurs with physical abuse and/or neglect. These cases typically involve financially dependent family members, particularly adult offspring, who have been cared for by the elderly person for years , if not decades. The abuse suffered by these elderly victims is frequently longstanding. Over time, however, as the elderly person’s health declines and the elderly person becomes more socially isolated, often as the result of the death of a spouse, the elderly person increasingly becomes more dependent on another family member for care, resulting in a mutual dependency, albeit with each member of the dyad experiencing a different type of dependency. Although sharing some features in common with physical abuse and neglect, hybrid financial exploitation cases are unique in many ways and tend to result in worse outcomes for elderly victims than result from other forms of elder maltreatment. These outcomes may be attributable to the additional stress associated with the financial loss that is experienced.

As we have indicated on numerous occasions, the first line of defense in identifying such hybrid financial abuse and exploitation are other family members, friends and professionals such as healthcare providers, social workers, doctors, nurses, certified public accountants, financial planners, bank employees and the like.

If you are aware of such hybrid financial abuse and exploitation, please consider that if you don’t help who will.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

There are several ways to categorize annuities, and any one annuity may fit into several categories. Immediate Annuities: With an immediate annuity, the annuant pays a single premium and immediately starts receiving payments at the end of each payment period, which is usually monthly or annually. Deferred Annuities: With a deferred annuity, the annuant pays one or more premiums over what is often called the accumulation period. The premiums paid and the interest credited to the premiums goes into a fund called an accumulation fund. There may be a minimum guaranteed interest rate at which the money will accumulate during the accumulation period. Fixed Annuities: A fixed annuity provides fixed-dollar income payments backed by the guarantees in the contract. The annuant cannot lose the investment once the income payments begin. The amount of those payments will not change. With fixed annuities, the company bears the investment risk. Variable Annuities: Variable annuity investments are securities, and fluctuate with economic conditions. The value of a variable annuity depends upon the value of the underlying investment portfolios associated with the annuity. The annuitant bears the investment risk for the value of the security. The value of the annuity will increase or decrease with the investment performance of the security.

Please keep in mind that the above information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If after reading this post, you should consult with a qualified professional.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

The general rule in Florida is that a misstatement in, or omission from, an application for insurance need not be intentional before recovery may be denied pursuant to 627.409. Florida Statute 627.409 provides that :

(1) Any statement or description made by or on behalf of an insured or annuitant in an application for an insurance policy or annuity contract, or in negotiations for a policy or contract, is a representation and is not a warranty. A misrepresentation, omission, concealment of fact, or incorrect statement may prevent recovery under the contract or policy only if any of the following apply:

(a) The misrepresentation, omission, concealment, or statement is fraudulent or is material either to the acceptance of the risk or to the hazard assumed by the insurer.

(b) If the true facts had been known to the insurer pursuant to a policy requirement or other requirement, the insurer in good faith would not have issued the policy or contract, would not have issued it at the same premium rate, would not have issued a policy or contract in as large an amount, or would not have provided coverage with respect to the hazard resulting in the loss.

(2) A breach or violation by the insured of any warranty, condition, or provision of any wet marine or transportation insurance policy, contract of insurance, endorsement, or application therefor does not void the policy or contract, or constitute a defense to a loss thereon, unless such breach or violation increased the hazard by any means within the control of the insured.

The courts, in Florida, have explained that section 627.409(1) allows for the voiding of a policy for misrepresentation or omission without regard to whether the same was intentional. This case law relating to insurance policies is consistent with the general principle in contract law that, to obtain rescission of a contract, based upon misrepresentation, it is not necessary that the party making the misrepresentation should have known that it was false. Innocent misrepresentations are sufficient, for though the misrepresentations may have been made innocently, it would be unjust and inequitable to permit a person who has made false representations, even innocently, to retain the fruits of a bargain induced by such misrepresentation. Although the law has also determined that parties are free to ‘contract-out’ or ‘contract around’ state or federal law with regard to an insurance contract, so long as there is nothing void as to public policy or statutory law about such a contract.

If, as the insured, you are dealing with an issue concerning a claim misrepresentation by the insurance carrier, you should contact a qualified attorney to discuss you specific factual circumstances verses the contract provisions to see if the fact in contention does in fact void the coverage contained in the policy.

Please keep in mind that this information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If the reader has any questions or comments concerning this post, you should contact a qualified professional.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

Florida law requires that insurance contracts are construed according to their plain meaning and, if a policy provision is clear and unambiguous, it should be enforced according to its terms. When a contract of insurance is subject to multiple interpretations, the policy language should be construed liberally in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer as author of the contract.

If, as an insured, you make a claim which is denied by your insurance carrier, it is imperative that you contact qualified counsel to make sure that the denial is justified. This is especially ture where the policy provision is subject to multiple interpretations.

Please be advised that the above information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

Prior to purchasing an indexed annuity, it is important that you understand various features contained in the annuity contract. Some of these items are set forth below. Please keep in mind that this information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If you you have any questions concerning the below information, you should contact a qualified professional.

What are some of the contract features of indexed annuities?

Indexed annuities are complicated products that may contain several features that can affect your return. You should understand how an indexed annuity computes its index-linked interest rate before you buy. First, any gains in the value of the index are generally computed without including dividends paid on the securities that make up the index. In addition, an insurance company may credit you with a lower return than the actual index’s gain. Some common features used to compute an indexed annuity’s interest rate include:

Participation Rates. The participation rate determines how much of the index’s increase will be used to compute the index-linked interest rate. For example, if the participation rate is 80% and the index increases 9%, the return credited to your annuity would be 7.2% (9% x 80% = 7.2%).

Interest Rate Caps. Some indexed annuities set a maximum rate of interest that the indexed annuity can earn. If a contract has an upper limit, or cap, of 7% and the index linked to the annuity gained 12%, only 7% would be credited to the annuity.

Margin/Spread/Asset or Administrative Fee. The index-linked interest for some annuities is determined by subtracting a percentage from any gain in the index. This fee is sometimes called the “margin,” “spread,” “asset fee,” or “administrative fee.” In the case of an annuity with a “spread” of 3%, if the index gained 9%, the return credited to the annuity would be 6% (9% – 3% = 6%).

It is important to note that indexed annuity contracts commonly allow the insurance company to change the participation rate, cap, and/or margin/spread/asset or administrative fee on a periodic – such as annual – basis. Such changes could adversely affect your return. Read your contract carefully to determine what changes the insurance company may make to these features.

Another feature that can have a dramatic impact on an indexed annuity’s return is its indexing method (or how the amount of change in the relevant index is determined). The amount of change is determined at the end of each “crediting period” within the contract’s accumulation period. In many contracts, the crediting period is one year, although the length of the crediting period may vary from one contract to another. Common indexing methods include:

Point-to-point. This method credits index-linked interest based on comparison of the index level at two discrete points in time, such as the beginning and ending dates of the crediting period.

Averaging. This method credits index-linked interest based on comparison of an average of index values at periodic – such as monthly – intervals during the crediting period to the index value at the beginning of the period.

You should note that insurance companies may not credit you with index-linked interest for a crediting period if you do not hold your contract to the end of the period.

These and other features may be included in an indexed annuity you are considering. Before you decide to buy an indexed annuity, you should understand how each feature works and what impact, together with other features, it may have on the annuity’s potential return.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

What is an indexed annuity?

An indexed annuity is a type of contract between you and an insurance company. During the accumulation period – when you make either a lump sum payment or a series of payments – the insurance company credits you with a return that is based on changes in a securities index, such as the S&P 500 Composite Stock Price Index. Indexed annuity contracts also provide that the contract value will be no less than a specified minimum, regardless of index performance. After the accumulation period, the insurance company will make periodic payments to you under the terms of your contract, unless you choose to receive your contract value in a lump sum.

Can you lose money buying an indexed annuity?

You can lose money buying an indexed annuity. If you need to cancel your annuity early, you may have to pay a significant surrender charge and tax penalties. A surrender charge may result in a loss of principal, so that an investor may receive less than his original purchase payments. Thus, even with a specified minimum value from the insurance company, it can take several years for an investment in an indexed annuity to “break even.”

Many indexed annuities do not apply negative changes in an index to contract value. Therefore, if the index value declines over the course of a crediting period, no deduction is taken from contract value. However, some indexed annuities are being offered that do apply negative changes in the index to contract value, so that if the index declines during the crediting period, you could lose money, whether or not you cancel early.

Further, all amounts payable under an indexed annuity are subject to the claims-paying ability of the insurance company. Circumstances may arise where the insurance company is unable to pay its obligations.

Before considering the purchase or sale of an indexed annuity, it is important that you fully and completely understand all of the material terms of the annuity contract. Also, it is critical to understand that the terms of the contract supersede any oral or written representations made as an inducement to get to purchase and sell the product.

Please keep in mind that the above information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If you have any questions concerning the contents of this post, you should contact a qualified professional.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

FAQ’s About Annuities:

An annuity is a contract or agreement with an insurance or investment company that provides a source of income or series of payments, from the investment either now or at a set future date, such as retirement. There are two basic types of annuities, deferred and immediate. Deferred annuities allow assets to grow tax-deferred over time before being converted to payments to the annuitant. Immediate annuities allow payments to begin within a year of purchase.

Annuities involve a long-term commitment and are not the right investment tool for individuals looking for short-term opportunities. Current law requires insurance companies and agents offering annuity products to seniors older than age 65 to clearly document the basis for selling the product, including consideration of a senior’s financial and tax status, as well as investment objectives.

Florida law also requires a cover page be fixed to any annuity policy informing the purchaser of the unconditional refund period described above. The cover page must also provide contact information for the issuing company and the selling agent, and the department’s toll-free help line. The cover page is part of the policy.

It is strongly urged that you carefully review and consider all of the advantages and disadvantages of any new purchase or replacement product. If an offer is made by an agent and/or company to move funds from a current annuity into a new annuity product, it is important to know that the new annuity will include a new surrender charge schedule and the guaranteed minimum interest rate in the new contract may be lower than the current annuity.

Please keep in mind that this information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as providing legal or investment advice. Annuities are complicated contracts. What is represented as a feature of the product has to be contained, in writing, within the contents of the contract. If what you have been told is not in the contract, it is a sign of fraud.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

In the Matter of Johan Mary-Lyn Akal, Case No.: 140353-13-AG:

On September 20, 2013, the Florida Department of Financial Services (“Department”) issued a Consent Order against Johan Mary-Lyn Akal, which, in part, required the Respondent to surrender to the Department of Insurance all licenses issued to the Respondent pursuant to the Florida Insurance Code.

The Department alleged that it conducted an investigation of the Respondent. As a result thereof, the Department alleged on January 2, 2013, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) entered a Disciplinary proceeding barring her against association with any FINRA member firm in any capacity for misappropriating customer funds, and failing to respond to requests for information and testimony.

In the Matter of: Charlotte Bredal Oliver, Case No.: 140535-13-AG:

On September 20, 2013, the Florida Department of Financial Services (“Department”) issued a Consent Order against Charlotte Bredal Oliver, which, in part, required the Respondent to surrender to the Department all licenses issued to the Respondent pursuant to the Florida Insurance Code.

The Department alleged that it conducted an investigation of the Respondent. As a result thereof, the Department alleged that on November 2, 2012 a Final Order was entered against the Respondent by the Florida Office of Financial Regulation permanently barring her from licensure or registration for selling unregistered securities.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

In the Matter of: Matthew Watson Shaw, Administrative Case No: 139968-13-AG:

On September 4, 2013, the Florida Department of Financial Services entered a Consent Order against Matthew Watson Shaw, which was based upon a Settlement Agreement for Consent Order dated August 9, 2013. In the Consent Order, the Respondent’s licensure and eligibility for licensure as an insurance agent within the State of Florida was surrendered to the Department.

According to the Settlement Stipulation for Consent Order, the Department conducted an investigation of the Respondent in his capacity as an agent. As a result thereof, the Department alleged that the Respondent knowingly made a false representation of an annuity contract for multiple consumers. In order to avoid formal litigation of this matter, the Respondent determined that it was in his best interests to enter into the Stipulation for Consent Order.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.

On April 10, 2013, the Department issued a Consent Order against A & D Insurance, which provided in relevant part, that the respondent surrender to the Department is agency registration.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of insurance and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Fort Lauderdale Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage and precious metal firms.