Jeremy Drake—Investment Fraud

California stockbroker fraud attorneyJeremy Drake Allegedly Defrauded a Well-known Professional Athlete and His Wife for Over Three Years by Purportedly Telling Them They Paid a Special “VIP” Annual Rate of 0.15 to 0.20% of their Assets Under Management when in Fact they Allegedly Paid 1%

Jeremy Drake, an investment adviser formerly of Los Angeles-based HCR Wealth Advisors, allegedly defrauded a well-known professional athlete and wife by purportedly telling them that they paid a special “VIP” annual rate of 0.15 to 0.20% of their assets under management when in fact they paid 1%, according to an SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Jason Kane and James Booker.

Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane securities practice lawyers are investigating Jeremy Drake’s alleged investment fraud.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to Jeremy Drake’s alleged investment fraud are encouraged to contact attorneys Jason Kane or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Drake’s alleged annual rate disinformation led the aforementioned clients to pay $1.2 million more in management fees than Drake represented with Drake purportedly taking in approximately $900,000 of incentive-based compensation based on the fees paid by the clients during the course of his alleged deception, according to the aforementioned SEC Complaint.

Drake’s Allegedly Went to Great Lengths to Hide His Deception, Including Creating a Character Known as “Ron Stenson” to Corroborate His Story; The SEC is Allegedly seeking a permanent injunction against Drake and a Return of His Allegedly Ill-gotten gains plus Interest and Penalties

Drake’s clients, in sum, allegedly placed over $35 million of their assets under Drake’s management, and Drake was the clients’ sole contact at HCR during the period when he acted as their advisor, according to the aforementioned Complaint from FINRA’s Department of Enforcement presently being reviewed by attorneys Jason Kane and James Booker.

The SEC further alleges that Drake went to great lengths to hide his fraud, including making and sending false documents including deceptive fee reports, sending false and misleading e-mails, and pretending to be another person to corroborate his lies, the Complaint reports.

For example, the SEC alleges that in June 2016, as one of the clients demanded an explanation about the fees, Drake created the persona of “Ron Stenson,” who purportedly corroborated Drake’s story, the Complaint states. Drake allegedly admitted to one of the clients, upon discovery of his alleged misdeeds, that he had been lying and warned her that reporting his alleged misconduct could result in bad publicity for her husband, the Complaint notes

The SEC charged Drake with allegedly violating and aiding and abetting violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act, and hence the SEC is seeking a permanent injunction, return of Drake’s allegedly ill-gotten gains plus interest, and penalties, the Complaint reports.

Drake met the clients back in 2008 when he worked for another investment advisory firm, but the clients were not named in the Complaint, the Complaint states.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged investment fraud and are currently investigating Jeremy Drake’s alleged investment fraud. 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 Jeremy Drake’s alleged investment fraud may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Wolf Carr & Kane, Jason Kane or James Booker, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at (585) 310-5140 or via e-mail at or

Peiffer Wolf (1253 Posts)

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.