Scott Goldman—Unsuitable Investment Strategy

Ponzi scheme recovery attorneysScott F. Goldman Allegedly Made Unsuitable Recommendations to an Elderly Customer which Involved Leveraged Precious Metal Products

Scott Goldman, from 2009 to 2010, allegedly made unsuitable recommendations to an elderly customer involving leveraged precious metal products, according to a recent FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

The aforementioned AWC further alleges that Scott Goldman’s elderly customer allegedly recovered losses through arbitration, and that said recommendations were unduly concentrated in risky, leveraged products.

Scott Goldman’s alleged risky recommendations allegedly violated NASD Rules as well as FINRA Rules, the AWC notes.

Goldman, in late 2009 and in 2010, allegedly utilized six assorted investment strategies which he labeled the “Champions” model, the AWC reports.

Said models allegedly made investments in mutual funds either directly with a mutual fund family or indirectly through the subaccounts of a variable annuity which he would buy, the AWC states.

The various models allegedly hold differing investment objective and assorted levels of risk dependent on the allocation of the customer’s funds, the AWC notes.

Goldman allegedly received discretion from his customers to transfer funds back and forth between a money market fund and other mutual funds available within the mutual fund family, the AWC reports.

What is more, said funds were allegedly also transferred between a variable annuity money market subaccount and other subaccounts within the annuity, based on various market factors monitored by Goldman, the AWC states.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Scott Goldman’s alleged unsuitable recommendations to an elderly customer.

Scott Goldman Suspended and Fined $10,000 by FINRA; Goldman Allegedly Recommended His Risky Champion Precious Metals Model to Clients

Scott Goldman allegedly recommended his Champion Precious Metals Model to clients, a model which was allegedly the riskiest of his so-called Champions Models, according to a recent FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) presently being examined by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

The Champions Precious Metals Model has been identified as the riskiest model as it was purportedly concentrated in just one often volatile sector, that of precious metals, the AWC states.

Said Model also allegedly had a habit of using leveraged mutual funds and FINRA makes a special note of the risky nature of such products, the AWC reports.

The AWC goes into much further detail that in the summer of 2009 Goldman allegedly made the acquaintance of the aforementioned customer and her husband. The husband was purportedly terminally ill and the customer was 68 years-old, the AWC states.

Following her husband’s death in August of 2009, the customer then made the decision to open an account with Goldman and made consultations with him with regards to investment strategies for her own assets, and also assets which she inherited from her deceased husband, the AWC notes.

Goldman, by November 2009, allegedly made recommendations that said Customer invest in his high risk Champion Precious Metals Model and said recommendations were made in transactions through January 2010 which added up to approximately $135,000, the AWC states.

Said investment allegedly added up to 22% of the Customer’s liquid net worth at that time, and that said investments were executed through two different accounts, the AWC states.

Afterward, in a sequence of trades in March and May of 2010, Goldman allegedly made recommendations for an extra $188.219 from the Customer’s deceased husband’s bank certificates of deposit (that she inherited) be added to the existing IRA Account, with the Precious Metals Fund, the AWC reports.

This led to, as of May of 2010, approximately 53% of the Customer’s liquid net worth to be invested in Goldman’s Champion Precious Metals Models at the times that the portfolios were fully allocated to the precious metals funds, the AWC states.

The aforementioned behavior violates NASD Rules which state that recommendations must be “suitable for the Customer based on the -other security holdings and [her] financial situation and needs,” the AWC reports.

Hence, Goldman’s alleged actions violated NASD and FINRA Rules and hence he has consented to a fine of $10,000 and a 20-day calendar suspension, the AWC notes.

One should also note that, according to the AWC, Scott F. Goldman 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 alleged acts of unsuitable trading in customer accounts and are currently investigating Scott Goldman’s alleged unsuitable recommendations in customer accounts. 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 Scott Goldman’s alleged unsuitable recommendations in customer accounts 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.