Roger Zullo & LPL Financial – Defrauding Clients and Falsifying Client Suitability Profiles

Roger Salvatore Zullo and LPL Financial Allegedly Defrauded His Clients, Falsified Client Financial Suitability Profiles, and Sold His Customers Unsuitable Variable Annuities

Roger Salvatore Zullo allegedly defrauded his clients, falsified client financial suitability profiles, and sold his customers unsuitable variable annuities, according to a Consent Order from the Massachusetts Securities Division currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating Roger Zullo’s alleged investment fraud and falsification of client suitability profiles.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to Roger Zullo’s alleged investment fraud and falsification of client suitability profiles are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Roger Zullo, a Boston securities broker, allegedly made fabricated client risk profiles in order to make sales of “scores” of annuities from 2013 through April 2016, the Order notes.

Zullo fell under the scope of a FINRA investigation which commenced on January 2017 regarding allegations of fraud, falsification, and unsuitability in the aforementioned complaint filed by the Massachusetts Securities Division, the Order states. Some sections of the alleged misconduct in the complaint also alleged purportedly affected customers who were senior citizens, the Order notes.

The complaint from the Massachusetts Securities Division also recently alleges that LPL Financial and Roger Zullo, allegedly profited on sales of unsuitable, illiquid, high-commission variable annuities and thus purportedly violated the firm’s own sales policies, the Order reports.

Zullo allegedly made $1.8 million in commissions and many of his customers purportedly surrendered cost of thousands of dollars, according to the aforementioned complaint filed by Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, the Order notes.

Roger Zullo Allegedly Consented to a Permanent Bar from the Securities Industry in Massachusetts, a $40,000 Administrative Fine, and Disgorgement of $1,875,348

Roger Zullo allegedly consented to a permanent bar from the securities industry in Massachusetts, a $40,000 administrative fine, and disgorgement of $1,875,348, according to the aforementioned Order currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Payment for disgorgement was waived due to Zullo‘s financial circumstances, the Order also states.

Zullo, who has been working in the securities industry since 1988, has no disclosure events listed on his BrokerCheck profile, according to FINRA.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged investment fraud and are currently investigating Roger Zullo’s alleged investment fraud and falsification of client suitability profiles. 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 Roger Zullo’s alleged investment fraud and falsification of client suitability profiles 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 (1206 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.