David Zier—Fraudulent Representations

Cleveland stockbroker fraud lawyerDavid Zier Allegedly Made Fraudulent Representations to Clients; Zier Allegedly Issued False Statements Related to a Commodity Pool He Operated as an Outside Business Activity

David Zier allegedly made fraudulent representations and issuances of false statements to clients connected to a commodity pool he operated as an outside business activity, according to an Order from the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in issues related to David Zier’s alleged outside business activities.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to David Zier’s alleged outside business activities are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Zier, from 2007 through 2014, and while employed at Convergent Wealth Advisors LLC (Convergent), allegedly solicited specific clients of Convergent, as well as other individuals, to invest in ZAM LLC, said Order states.

Hence, the CFTC’s Order requires Convergent to pay out a $800,000 civil monetary penalty, and also sets provisos that Convergent not violate certain provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC Regulations, the Order notes.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating David Zier’s alleged outside business activities.

David Zier Allegedly Misrepresented ZAM’s Profitability and also Produced False Performance Data Given to Existing ZAM Investors

David Zier allegedly made misrepresentations regarding ZAM’s profitability and also allegedly produced false performance data that was purportedly given to existing ZAM investors, according to the aforementioned CFTC Order currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Furthermore, Convergent also allegedly had the ability to monitor ZAM’s financial accounts and Zier’s e-mail correspondence relating to ZAM’s administration, the Order states.

Then, in 2014, Convergent compliance personnel allegedly discovered certain inconsistencies among certain ZAM account statements and performance reports which had been allegedly provided to Convergent clients who were also participants in ZAM, the Order notes.

In the time period from December 23, 2010 until Zier’s death, the total amount of alleged fraudulent solicitations in ZAM totaled $2,912,960, the Order states.

It should also be noted that Zier allegedly began operating ZAM in 1998 as an exempt commodity pool, as an outside business activity, and over a16 year period ZAM allegedly held 20 pool participants including Convergent Wealth Advisors’ founder and prior CEO, the Order notes.

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 David Zier’s alleged outside business activities. 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 David Zier’s alleged outside business activities 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 (1168 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.