Patrick Golden – Private Securities Transactions

New York investor rights attorneyPatrick Thomas Golden Allegedly Took Part in Two Private Securities Transactions Totaling $115,000 and Accepted Two Customer Loans Adding up to $153,000

Patrick Golden allegedly engaged in two private securities transactions totaling $115,000 and also allegedly accepted four loans adding up to $153,000 from two customers, according to a FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Several Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in Golden’s alleged private securities transactions.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in Golden’s alleged private securities transactions are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Golden, between March 2011 and April 2013 allegedly engaged in the two aforementioned private securities transactions without allegedly providing prior written notice to his member firm describing the details of the transactions, the AWC notes.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Patrick Golden’s private securities transactions.

Patrick Thomas Golden Suspended and Fined $15,000 by FIRNA for Alleged Private Securities Transactions

Patrick Golden, between October 2009 and October 2014, allegedly failed to provide the required notice to Fenner & Smith Incorporated regarding two outside business activities, according to the aforementioned recent FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) presently being examined by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

The AWC also details that one of the key purported transactions allegedly involved an entity that owned and operated a restaurant (IRG Investment Group, Inc.) and became a customer of Golden‘s firm, and that he serviced its account, the AWC reports.

Golden allegedly gave written notice to the firm which misrepresented that the entity’s principal, known only as SM, was purportedly going to hand over its shares to Golden’s wife, the AWC states.

What is more, neither Golden nor his wife was allegedly investing any money into the entity and later, via a company that Golden purportedly solely owned (Golden Investment Group, LLC – GIG), he bought the shares of IRG for $15,000 and received a stock certificate for the purchase, the AWC notes.

Hence, based on the aforementioned behavior, Golden allegedly violated NASD and FINRA Rules, and has been suspended and fined $15,000 by FINRA, the AWC notes.

One should also note that, according to the AWC, Patrick Golden 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 outside business activity and are currently investigating Patrick Golden’s private securities transactions. 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 Patrick Golden’s private securities transactions 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 (1123 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.