Customers Accuse Ex-Fortune Financial Services Broker Jonathan Freeze of Alternative Investment Fraud

Former Canonsburg, Pennsylvania Stockbroker Faces Selling Away Allegations

Three years after the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) barred him, Jonathan Douglas Freeze remains the subject of eight pending customer disputes. Most of these investor claims accuse him of selling away and investing customers’ funds in Alternative Investment Holdings, a North Carolina real estate and investment holdings company, without Fortune Financial Services’ authorization.  

Freeze worked 21 years in the industry. He also previously was a broker for Summit Brokerage Services, LPL Financial (LPLA), Lincoln Financial Advisors, and The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company.

Jonathan Freeze is also a former registered investment advisor. In 2013, Stratos Wealth Partners, an investment advisory firm that works in conjunction with LPL Financial, fired him for violating one of its policies by accepting a loan from a customer.  

Our alternative investment fraud lawyers at Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas (SSEK Law Firm) are speaking with former customers of ex- broker, Jonathan Freeze, who suffered significant financial losses related to investment recommendations and trades he made for them. We can help you explore your legal options.

Customer Claims Involving the Ex-Fortune Financial Services Broker

Below, are the various disclosures on Jonathan Freeze’s record. According to his BrokerCheck record, he has a total of 23 disclosures against him beginning in 2010 with the most recent occurring in June 2019. 

  • 6/2019: His former clients accuse him of facilitating the liquidation of $175K from their account to buy promissory notes. In their FINRA arbitration claim, the claimants are seeking that same amount in damages.
  • 3/2019: The customer alleges that Freeze engaged in selling away, which is when a broker persuades a client to buy securities that the brokerage firm was not holding or offering. The claimant is seeking $84K for damages related to investing in Alternative Investment Holdings.
  • 3/2019: In this selling away case involving Alternative Investment Holdings, the claimant is requesting $330K in damages.
  • 2/2019: The customer in this alternative investment fraud case is seeking $118,500.
  • 2/2019: Another claimant with a selling away claim involving the same alternative investment is requesting $75K in damages. 
  • 2/2019: In this alternative investment fraud case, the claimant is requesting $370K in damages.
  • 2/2019: This selling away claim seeks $90K in damages.
  • 12/2017: This unsuitable investment fraud claim, potentially involving promissory notes and also alleging that Freeze engaged in selling away, requested $165K in damages. The case was closed due to a lack of action.
  • 10/2017: In yet another selling away complaint involving Alternative Investment Holdings, the claimant is requesting $30K in damages.

FINRA barred Freeze in 2015 after the former broker and investment advisor refused to provide documents and other key information during the self-regulatory organization (SRO’s) probe into allegations that he had borrowed $20K from a customer, who was his friend, without getting the firm’s approval.

The other financial disclosures on Freeze’s BrokerCheck record are related to his divorce. 

Understanding Selling Away 

Brokers are only supposed to recommend and sell investments that have been approved by their firm. Unfortunately, selling away does happen, with registered representatives selling unregistered securities and other unapproved investments that haven’t been vetted by the broker-dealer. This increases the risk of exposure to fraud and/or investment losses.  

Brokerage firms have a duty to purposely supervise their brokers. They can be held liable for losses related to selling away.

Are You a Victim of Alternative Investment Fraud?

Alternative investments typically are financial assets that fall outside the more traditional asset classes. The majority of these investments are held by high net worth individual investors and institutional investors. This type of investment tends to be complex, risky, and unregulated. They are usually not suitable for retail investors, inexperienced investors, retirees, and older investors.

Contact SSEK Law Firm to request your free, no-obligation case consultation today and we can help you discover your legal options.

Contact Information