COVID-19 UPDATE: We're Open and Ready to Serve Our ClientsLearn More Here

Fired Ameriprise Broker Bryant Caveness is Accused of Stockbroker Fraud & Ethics Violation Allegations

FINRA Bars Former Registered Representative Following Probe Into Accusations

Bryant Edwin Caveness, an ex-Ameriprise Financial Services stockbroker, has been barred by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) after he stopped cooperating in the self-regulatory organization (SRO)’s probe into his firing by the firm. 

According to his Form U5 termination letter, the broker-dealer let him go last month because he violated company policies involving “personal trade, ethics, and solicitation of exchange-traded products” resulting in stockbroker fraud and misconduct. 

At Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas (SSEK Law Firm), we are speaking with former customers of the ex-Ameriprise broker, Bryant Caveness, to help them determine whether they have grounds for an investor claim to recoup their losses.

Suspect Transactions Involving Older Customers Spurred the SRO’s Probe 

Older customers are among those who may have been harmed by Bryant Caveness’s alleged stockbroker fraud actions. According to the FINRA letter of acceptance, waiver, and consent (AWC) which the ex-broker signed, agreeing to the sanctions but without denying or admitting to the findings, the SRO initiated its investigation because he may have received checks from older clients. These payments would have caused concern if they were not the normal payments he received from their work together at Ameriprise.

Caveness was cooperating with the FINRA probe but recently made it clear that he would not give the SRO the information and documents it requested, which led to his bar. 

The ex-Ameriprise Financial Services broker worked 20 years in the industry. He also was previously with Ameriprise Advisor Services and before that, he was a Morgan Stanley broker. 

According to his BrokerCheck record, Caveness has two customer disputes that occurred way before these latest allegations. One former client says the ex-broker engaged in unsuitable trading. That claim led to an $85K settlement. An earlier dispute from 2001 alleging unsuitable investment recommendations was settled by Morgan Stanley for $37,500. 

Broker-Dealers and Their Duty to Supervise

Even if a firm did not play a role in a broker’s wrongful or careless actions, it is the brokerage firm’s duty to properly supervise all of its registered representatives and oversee all transactions made by them. When a failure to properly supervise allows fraud, negligence, or ethics violations to happen, a customer may have grounds for filing an inadequate supervision claim against the firm. 

If you are wondering if your investment losses while working with an Ameriprise broker was a result of stockbroker fraud, negligence, or inadequate supervision on behalf of the brokerage firm. Contact SSEK Law Firm for your free consultation using our contact form or by calling (800) 259-9010.

Contact Information