Thomas Edward Andrews— Fraudulent Theft of Investment Funds

Ponzi scheme attorneysThomas Edward Andrews, Purportedly with the Known Assistance of Scott Walter Christensen, Allegedly Convinced 23 Investors to Put $8.38 million of Savings and Retirement Funds into Two Investments; Andrews Allegedly Solicited Investors, Mostly from a Small Utah Community, into Two Investments,  “the Jackson Trust” and “the Lincoln”

Thomas Edward Andrews, with the knowing assistance of Scott Walter Christensen and from 2010 through the autumn of 2015, allegedly lured 23 investors to put savings and retirement funds into two investments, “the Jackson Trust” and “the Lincoln”, according to an SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in issues related to Thomas Edward Andrews’ alleged investment fraud.

Investors who believe they may have lost money in activity related to Thomas Edward Andrews’ alleged investment fraud are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Thomas Edward Andrews allegedly went after investors who were financially unsophisticated and residents of a small rural Utah community, according to the aforementioned SEC Complaint.

Thomas Edward Andrews, a former LPL Financial representative who was employed as an independent contractor by Gary A. York & Associates of Salt Lake City, an office of supervisory jurisdiction of LPL Financial, allegedly made statements to his investors that they were making financial investments, the Complaint reports.

Andrews, however, was allegedly misappropriating investor funds for his own use and the purported aforementioned scheme brought in approximately $8.38 million, the Complaint notes.

A high percentage of Andrews’ alleged victims were people he had previously known while growing up in Nephi, Utah, and many of the individuals had first been clients of a tax, accounting and bookkeeping business run by Andrews’ father, the SEC Complaint notes.

Thomas Edward Andrews and Scott Walter Christensen, directly and indirectly, singly and in concert, have also allegedly made use of the means of interstate commerce and the mails in connection with the transactions, acts and courses of business alleged herein, most of which have occurred within Utah, the Complaint reports.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Thomas Edward Andrews’ alleged fraudulent theft of investment funds.

Thomas Edward Andrews Allegedly Began Making Suggestions to his Clients that They Sell off Other Investments and Put Money in “the Jackson Trust”; In reality, the “Jackson Trust” Never Existed and Andrews Allegedly Was Misappropriating Clients’ funds for Personal Use

Thomas Edward Andrews allegedly began urging his clients that they liquidate their other investments and invest in “the Jackson Trust”, according to the aforementioned SEC Complaint currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

In reality, the “Jackson Trust” allegedly did not exist and Andrews was simply misappropriating his clients’ funds for personal use, the Complaint reports.

Andrews allegedly organized a bank account called the “Jackson Trust” at a local credit union, and he himself was the trustee and sole signatory, the Complaint reports.

Thomas Edward Andrews, according to the SEC Complaint, allegedly simply deposited the investors’ checks into the aforementioned accounts and over a period of time and purportedly transferred the funds to his own account at the same credit union without the knowledge of his investors.

Thomas Edward Andrews also allegedly never made transfers of his investors’ funds to any legitimate investment, the Complaint notes.

Andrews also allegedly hid his activity related to the Jackson Trust from his supervisor at York & Associates and from LPL and also allegedly made statements to his investors that the Jackson Trust provided 6 to 8.5% annual returns, the Complaint states.

What is more, Thomas Edward Andrews also allegedly promised investors that the investment was of a “guaranteed” nature and also told a few investors specifically that the investment was guaranteed by LPL, the Complaint reports.

Andrews, for example, allegedly told another investor that he also had special access to this particular opportunity because of his contacts with certain so-called “capital companies”, the SEC Complaint notes.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of investment fraud and are currently investigating Thomas Edward Andrews’ alleged fraudulent theft of investment funds. 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 Thomas Edward Andrews’ alleged fraudulent theft of investment funds 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 (1225 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.