Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc.

Discharged

Employment terminated after consenting to a permanent bar from the industry related to rule violations that occurred at a prior firm.

FINRA

Isaacson was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he made fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions of material facts to a customer at his member firm regarding the customer's account values and Isaacson's purchases and sales of securities in the customer's accounts. The complaint alleges that on telephone calls Isaacson conducted with the customer, Isaacson intentionally and repeatedly misrepresented the actual daily value of the customer's firm accounts such that, by January 2014, the customer believed his accounts to be worth $3.1 million more than their actual value. Isaacson made the misrepresentations in order to conceal losses and that the customer's accounts were not achieving the four to six percent return that Isaacson promised. Prior to January 10, 2014, Isaacson never corrected his misrepresentations about the value of the customer's accounts and never told the customer that he had continued to purchase shares of a security and longer term bonds despite the customer's explicit instructions to the contrary. As a result of the foregoing misconduct, Isaacson willfully violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and violated FINRA Rule 2020. The complaint also alleges that Isaacson effected approximately 360 unauthorized trades in the customer's accounts, including transactions in certain securities the customer had expressly prohibited Isaacson from purchasing. Isaacson failed to discuss these trades with the customer and made additional misrepresentations to the customer regarding certain transactions, effectively concealing his unauthorized trades. Isaacson did not inform the customer of or seek the customer's approval for the transactions he effected in the customer's non-discretionary firm accounts. The complaint also alleges that when the customer discovered Isaacson's misconduct in January 2014, Isaacson attempted to settle the customer's complaint away from his firm. Isaacson offered to pay the customer $100,000 a year, or to invest money the customer had available through a line of credit with the firm. In the event the customer selected the latter option, Isaacson offered to make interest payments due on the customer's line of credit until his trading generated sufficient funds to repay both the line of the credit and the $3.1 million the customer believed his accounts had earned based on Isaacson's misrepresentations. Isaacson's proposed settlement with the customer was made without the knowledge or approval of the firm.

Decision & Order of Offer of Settlement

Bar (Permanent)

All Capacities

Indefinite

7/25/2017

The settlement includes a finding that Isaacson willfully violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and that under Article III, Section 4 of FINRA's By-Laws, this makes him subject to a statutory disqualification with respect to association with a member.

Without admitting or denying the allegations, Isaacson consented to the sanction and to the entry of findings that during telephone calls with a customer, Isaacson intentionally and repeatedly provided the customer with false information about the actual value of the customer's firm accounts. The findings stated that Isaacson knew the customer relied upon him for accurate account information and, because of Isaacson's misrepresentations and omissions, by January 2014, the customer believed his firm accounts held $3.1 million more than their actual value. Isaacson also intentionally told the customer that he sold the shares of a security and long-term bonds he had purchased in the customer's accounts when, in fact, he did not do so. Isaacson knew that his representations to the customer about his daily account values and trading activities were false and misleading. However, prior to January 10, 2014, Isaacson never corrected his misrepresentations about the value of the customer's accounts and never told the customer that he had continued to purchase shares of the security and longer term bonds despite the customer's explicit instructions to the contrary. Isaacson's misrepresentations and omissions also concealed his unauthorized trades in the customer's accounts. Those unauthorized trades included purchases of securities that the customer had expressly instructed Isaacson to divest and securities with characteristics that the customer had expressly instructed Isaacson to abstain from purchasing. As a result of his conduct, Isaacson willfully violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and violated FINRA Rule 2020. The findings also stated that after the customer learned that Isaacson purchased shares of a security in the customer's discretionary account in February 2011, the customer told Isaacson that he did want not to be invested in the security and directed Isaacson to sell the shares. Isaacson did not follow the customer's instructions and, in fact, continued to purchase the security shares on the customer's behalf in the customer's discretionary accounts through August 2013. As a result of Isaacson's failure to follow the customer's express instructions, the customer's shares of the security were ultimately sold in January 2014 at a loss of approximately $187,000. Similarly, although the customer instructed Isaacson to sell any bond positions with a maturity of more than three years in his firm accounts, Isaacson did not. Instead, he continued to purchase bonds with a maturity of more than three years, purchasing such bonds in the customer's non-discretionary accounts on at least 21 occasions during the period of June 2012 to November 2013. The findings also included that Isaacson effected transactions in the customer's accounts without the customer's knowledge and authorization and in contravention to the customer's express orders not to do so, and he effected approximately 333 additional trades in the customer's non-discretionary accounts without the customer's knowledge and authorization. FINRA found that Isaacson attempted to settle a customer complaint away from his firm by proposing a settlement with the customer without the knowledge or approval of the firm.

Utah

The Division alleged Respondent was subject to a fraud judgment under Section 61-1-6(2) of the Utah Uniform Securities Act, made fraudulent misrepresentations or omissions under Section 61-1-1(2) of the Act, engaged in fraudulent acts, practices or a course of business under Section 61-1-1(3) of the Act, and dishonest or unethical practices under Section 61-1-6 of the Act.

Stipulation and Consent

Bar (Permanent)

all

Cease and Desist

Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)

$130,000.00

Revocation

CLAIMANT ALLEGED, INTER ALIA, MISREPRESENTATION WITH RESPECT TO PROVIDING CLIENT WITH INACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CLIENT'S ACCOUNT PERFORMANCE - 2011 TO 2014.

$3,586,989.00

FINRA's disposition detail comment: Respondent Isaacson and his member firm shall pay to Claimants $993,989.00 as disgorgement of brokerage fees and commissions paid by Claimants to the firm and $2,593,000.00 representing the difference between the actual account balance and the value verbally reported to a Claimant by Respondent Isaacson. Respondent Isaacson and his firm shall pay to Claimants interest on the foregoing amounts.

MORGAN STANLEY WEALTH MANAGEMENT

Voluntary Resignation

ALLEGATIONS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE VERBALLY PROVIDED A CLIENT INACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CLIENT'S ACCOUNT PERFORMANCE.

TIME FRAME: 11-20-08 THRU 12-8-08 CLIENT ALLEGES THAT THE FA FAILED TO PURCHASE GE STOCK DESPITE HIS INSTRUCTIONS TO DO SO. DAMAGES ESTIMATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $5,000.

$5,000.00

FINANCIAL ADVISOR ASSERTS THE FOLLOWING: THE CUSTOMER GAVE ME A NUMBER ORDERS TO BUY GE. I SUBMITTED THE ORDERS AS INSTRUCTED AND THE ORDERS FILLED, AND I CONFIRMED THESE ORDERS TO THE CUSTOMER. APPROXIMATELY 6 WEEKS LATER, THE CUSTOMER INFORMS ME THAT THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER PURCHASE FOR 5,000 SHARES. I DENY THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER 5,000 SHARE ORDER. I HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY UBS THAT THEIR FIRM HAS MADE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION AND FINDS ALL ALLEGATIONS TO BE FALSE.

CLIENT SEEKS REIMBURSEMENT OF DAMAGES INCLUDING COMMISSION AND MARGIN INTEREST RELATED TO THE UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITY IN HER ACCOUNTS. SHE CLAIMS MUCH OF THE ACTIVITY IN QUESTION TOOK PLACE WHILE SHE WAS IN REHABILITATION OR INCARCERATED.

$2,003,000.00