Christopher Hickman– Unsuitable Pattern of Short-term Trading

Christopher R. Hickman Allegedly Engaged in an Unsuitable Pattern of Short-term Trading of UIT’s in Six Customer Accounts; Hickman’s Clients Allegedly Lost Approximately $115,989.75

Christopher Hickman, of Delray Beach, Florida and a former advisor at Cetera Advisors, allegedly engaged in a pattern of unsuitable short-term trading of UIT’s in six customer accounts with purported losses of approximately $115,989.75, according to a recent Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to Christopher Hickman’s alleged pattern of unsuitable short-term trading are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Christopher Hickman’s alleged pattern of unsuitable short-term trading.

Christopher Hickman’s six aforementioned customer accounts, between May 2011 and April 2104, allegedly had UIT’s with an average holding period of approximately 136 days, according to the aforementioned AWC.

A few of the Unit Investment Trusts allegedly held upfront fees and commissions of up to 3.95% and the customers were purportedly paying excessive commissions on this trading, the AWC reports.

Christopher Hickman Suspended for Five Months from the Securities Industry and Fined $5,000 by FINRA as well Ordered to Pay $115,989 in Restitution to Six Customers

Christopher Hickman, who was a financial advisor and registered representative of Cetera Advisors from September 2009 to July 2015, has been suspended for five months from the securities industry and fined $5,000 by FINRA as well being ordered to pay restitution of $115,989 to six customers, according to the aforementioned AWC currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

UITs are investment companies that offer shares of a fixed portfolio of securities in a one-time public offering, and terminate on a specified date, according to the AWC. What is more, they are not designed to be used as trading vehicles, and UITs typically carry significant upfront charges as with mutual funds that carry front-end sales charges, short-term trading of UITs is presumptively improper, the AWC reports.

Christopher Hickman, according to his FINRA BrokerCheck Report, allegedly has had seven broker disputes in total, and only one recent dispute requesting $265,000 damages alleging negligence, breach of contract, and elder abuse.

One should also note that, according to the AWC, Christopher Hickman neither admitted nor denied the FINRA findings.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of investment fraud and are currently investigating Christopher Hickman’s alleged pattern of unsuitable short-term trading. They take most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance the case costs, and only get paid for their fees and costs out of money they recover for their clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of Christopher Hickman’s alleged pattern of unsuitable short-term trading may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Rosca Wolf, Alan Rosca or James Booker, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 888-998-0520 or via e-mail at arosca@prwlegal.com or jbooker@prwlegal.com.

Alan Rosca (1200 Posts)

Alan is a securities lawyer. He also teaches Securities Regulation at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. He focuses his legal practice on complex commercial and financial litigation and arbitration, particularly in the areas of securities and investment fraud. His office is in Cleveland, Ohio.


In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow cases about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent blogs regarding various developments that may occur in such cases. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such cases and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such cases.