Richard Gomez – Excessive Trading

California stockbroker fraud attorneyRichard Gomez Allegedly Engaged in Excessive Trading of Three IRA’s; Gomez also Allegedly Engaged in Unethical Behavior via a Settlement Agreement

Richard Gomez allegedly engaged in several types of misconduct in four separate IRAs of three Avenir customers, according to a recent FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

The AWC also makes statements which allege that Gomez excessively traded the three IRAs belonging to clients known only as CW and DW.

Gomez also allegedly exercised discretion without written authority for a total of 222 trades in the same aforementioned IRAs, the AWC reports.

Furthermore, Gomez also allegedly implemented an unsuitable trading strategy in the IRA of a client only known as DK, the AWC notes.

Following purported complaints from DK, Gomez then allegedly engaged in unethical behavior when he allegedly executed a settlement agreement that he never intended to honor, the AWC states.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Gomez’s alleged excessive trading

Richard Gomez Suspended by FINRA for Allegedly Violating the Just and Equitable Principles of Trade

DW purportedly had a salary of $300,000, and, in December of 2013, allegedly discussed retirement accounts which were held, according to the aforementioned recent FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) presently being examined by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Gomez allegedly solicited DW and his wife, CW, to transfer some of their retirement assets to accounts at Avenir, with Gomez as their registered rep, the AWC notes.

ln the same month, CW allegedly transferred funds from her separate brokerage account to open a new Avenir IRA with approximately $44,000, and in February 2014 CW also allegedly transferred additional cash from her separate brokerage account to open and fund a second Avenir IRA with approximately $750,000.

DW and CW each had an investment objective of “capital preservation,” and a “moderate” to “moderately aggressive” risk tolerance for their Avenir IRAs.

By reason of the foregoing, Gomez allegedly violated the just and equitable principles of trade and FINRA Rules, the AWC reports.

On October 30, 2015, Avenir filed with FINRA a Uniform Termination Notice for Securities Industry Registration reporting that the Firm had permitted Gomez to resign for having “no business for several months” and owing the Firm approximately $2,700, the AWC states.

One should also note that, according to the AWC, Richard Gomez 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 unsuitable recommendations and are currently investigating Richard Gomez alleged unsuitable recommendations and excessive 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 Richard Gomez’s alleged unsuitable recommendations and excessive 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 (1157 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.