Michael Patrick Murphy Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Michael Patrick Murphy  – and the firm that employs him or her – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

If you are like most people, before you go out to dinner at a new restaurant, you probably take a quick look at the reviews. This makes sense; you are going to pay for an expensive dinner, and you need to be sure that you are getting a good value.

Yet, when choosing a financial advisor, many people fail to conduct this same level of due diligence. Before turning over access to your money, you need to be sure that you have found a financial advisor that you can trust. Here, our audit report, including details of allegations, complaints, and sanctions will help you decide whether or not to invest with Michael Patrick Murphy.

BrokerComplaints.com is currently investigating allegations related to Michael Patrick Murphy. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.

About Michael Murphy

Michael Patrick Murphy is an Investment Adviser. Michael Patrick Murphy’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 2596905 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/2596905.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Michael Patrick Murphy.

Michael Patrick Murphy has previously been reprimanded and has disclosures and/or client dispute(s) listed at FINRA BrokerCheck.

Accusations and Disclosures

You can find below, a quick snapshot of Michael Patrick Murphy’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 4/15/2019
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 2017053843901
• DocketNumberAAO: 2017053843901
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: Murphy was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he willfully failed to timely amend his Form U4 to disclose three federal income tax liens filed by the IRS and four tax warrants filed by the State of New York totaling more than $6 million. The findings stated that Murphy ignored his obligation to report the liens and tax warrants. FINRA sent Murphy letters notifying him of tax liens it had identified through public records searches, and reminding him of his obligation to report those liens. Despite this prompting, Murphy still failed to disclose his liens. In addition, Murphy willfully provided inaccurate information on his Form U4 when he belatedly amended it to report that he first learned of those liens and tax warrants only 30 days before he filed the Form U4 amendments.
• Resolution: Decision
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $20,000.00 Sanctions: Monetary Penalty other than Fines
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $8,541.44 Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: All capacities
• Duration: six months
• Start Date: 7/20/2020
• End Date: 1/19/2021
• Sanctions: The decision includes a finding that Murphy willfully failed to disclose a material fact on a Form U4, and that under Section 3(a)(39)(F) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Article III, Section 4 of the FINRA By-Laws, this omission make him subject to a statutory disqualification with respect to association with a member.
• Regulator Statement: Hearing Panel decision rendered May 27, 2020 wherein Murphy is fined $20,000, suspended from association with any FINRA member in all capacities for six months, and ordered to pay hearing costs of $8,541.44. The sanctions were based on findings that he willfully failed to timely amend his Form U4 to disclose federal income tax liens and State of New York income tax warrants, totaling more than $6 million. The findings stated that FINRA sent Murphy disclosure letters notifying him of tax liens it had identified through public records searches, and reminding him of his obligation to report those liens. Despite this prompting, Murphy still failed to disclose his liens. The findings also stated that Murphy willfully provided inaccurate information on his Form U4 when he belatedly amended it to falsely report that he first learned of the liens and tax warrants only 30 days before he filed the Form U4 amendments. The decision became final on July 14, 2020.

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 2/6/2015
• Disclosure Type: Judgment / Lien
• Disclosure Resolution:
• Disclosure Detail :: Judgment/Lien Amount: $738,687.00
• Judgment/Lien Type: Civil
• Broker Comment: This action was brought by a real estate firm that had absolutely no right to any fee on the sale of this property. We are in the process of disputing this matter & hope to have it resolved in the very near future.

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 6/17/2005
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Award / Judgment
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: CUSTOMER ALLEGES SHARES WERE SOLD WITHOUT HER APPROVAL. ALL SHARES WERE SOLD FOR MARGIN SELL-OUTS.
• Damage Amount Requested: $25,000.00
• Damages Granted: $13,750.00
• Arbitration Claim Filed Detail: 05-03091
• Arbitration Docket Number:
• Broker Comment: THE CLIENT AUTHORIZED THE PURCHASE OF US STEEL STOCK. THE STOCK PURCHASE WAS NEVER PAID FOR AND THE STOCK WAS SOLD. THE STOCK PRICE WENT HIGHER AND THE CUSTOMER COMPLAINED THAT IS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SOLD. AGAIN, THE STOCK WAS SOLD BECAUSE THE CUSTOMER DID NOT SEND THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THE TRADE.

DISCLOSURE 4 – 

• Event Date: 12/8/2003
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: CLI030028
• DocketNumberAAO: 030028
• Initiated By: NASD
• Allegations: NASD RULES 2110, 2860(B)(20), 3010(A), 3010(B) – RESPONDENT FAILED TO ADEQUATELY SUPERVISE A REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE WHO WAS MAKING UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PUBLIC CUSTOMERS AND ENGAGING IN EXCESSIVE TRADING IN THE ACCOUNTS OF PUBLIC CUSTOMERS; AND A MEMBER FIRM, ACTING THROUGH MURPHY, FAILED TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A SUPERVISORY SYSTEM REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH NASD RULES AGAINST BROKERS MAKING UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS AND ENGAGING IN EXCESSIVE TRADING.
• Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Monetary/Fine
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $9,000.00 Sanctions: Disgorgement/Restitution Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details: WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, MURPHY CONSENTED TO THE DESCRIBED SANCTIONS AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS, THEREFORE, HE IS FINED $9,000, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, SUSPENDED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY NASD MEMBER IN ANY PRINCIPAL CAPACITY FOR TWO MONTHS,AND ORDERED TO PAY PARTIAL RESTITUTION OF $209,882.60, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, TO PUBLIC CUSTOMERS. SATISFACTORY PROOF OF PAYMENT OF $15,000 RESTITUTION, PLUS INTEREST, SHALL BE PROVIDED TO NASD NO LATER THAN 120 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF THIS AWC. SATISFACTORY PROOF OF PAYMENT OF $194,882.60 IN RESTITUTION IN MONTHLY PAYMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED NASD NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE LAST DAY OF EACH MONTH. ANY UNDISTRIBUTED RESTITUTION AND INTEREST SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE APPROPRIATE ESCHEAT, UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, OR ABANDONED PROPERTY FUND FOR THE STATE IN WHICH THE CUSTOMER LAST RESIDED. SUSPENSION EFFECTIVE JANUARY 20, 2004 TO CLOSE OF BUSINESS MARCH 19, 2004.

According to a study prepared for the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, 80 percent of American investors report that they have been solicited to participate in a fraud scheme, while 11 percent of American investors report that they personally lost money as a result of fraud.

FINRA notes that the rate of investment fraud is most likely much higher than it is reported. This is because many victims of financial advisor scams are too ashamed to come forward. Further, the study also found that a significant number of investors do not know how to spot common red flags of investment fraud. The least you should do is share your experience with other potential victims of investment scams.

Previous Associations

Under federal securities law and securities industry regulations, registered investment firms have a legal duty to supervise their financial advisors. Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 makes a securities firm liable for the conduct of representatives.

• COLUMBUS ADVISORY GROUP, LTD. (CRD#: 126331) :: 9/8/2003 – 11/9/2020 :: NEW YORK, NY
• MURJEN FINANCIAL, INC. (CRD#: 100340) :: 9/11/2003 – 9/23/2003 :: SYOSSET, NY
• MURJEN FINANCIAL, INC. (CRD#: 100340) :: 12/20/1999 – 9/9/2003 :: SYOSSET, NY
• JWGENESIS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 11025) :: 11/9/1998 – 1/13/2000 :: ST. LOUIS, MO
• CONTINENTAL BROKER-DEALER CORP. (CRD#: 14048) :: 1/27/1997 – 12/10/1998 :: CARLE PLACE, NY
• INVESTORS ASSOCIATES, INC. (CRD#: 958) :: 4/9/1996 – 3/27/1997 :: HACKENSACK, NJ
• FIRST UNITED EQUITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 36398) :: 10/17/1996 – 3/3/1997 :: NEW YORK, NY
• INVESTORS ASSOCIATES, INC. (CRD#: 958) :: 8/4/1995 – 4/3/1996 :: HACKENSACK, NJ
• JW CHARLES SECURITIES,INC. (CRD#: 33832) :: 7/27/1995 – 9/1/1995 :: BOCA RATON, FL
• OPPENHEIMER & CO., INC. (CRD#: 630) :: 6/15/1995 – 7/6/1995 :: NEW YORK, NY

The duty to supervise securities representatives is a strong legal requirement. Registered investment firms must take many different steps to ensure that they are protecting their customers from irresponsible and criminal financial advisors.

Legit or Not?

Unfortunately, stockbroker fraud is more common than many investors would like to think. And yes, stockbrokers (including Michael Patrick Murphy, but not limited to)  can (and do) steal money from their clients. While it’s rare that a broker will literally steal his client’s money (though that does happen), typically the “theft” of investment funds comes in the form of other fraudulent violations of securities law and FINRA rules which leads to significant investment losses.

Investors generally understand that there are risks associated with buying and selling securities. The market can go up, and the market can go down. No matter how skilled of an investor you are, there are always risks. With that being said, sometimes investment losses cannot be blamed on simple back luck.

There are 10 major types of complaints we receive against Investment Brokers –

• Outright Theft (Conversion of Funds)
• Unauthorized Trading
• Misrepresentation or Omission of Material Facts
• Excessive Trading (Churning)
• Lack of Diversification
• Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
• Failure to Disclose a Personal Conflict of Interest
• Front Running of Transactions
• Breakpoint Sale Violations
• Negligent Portfolio Management

Do your due diligence before investing. Public records are available for everybody to review and decide on the safest bet. 

How to Protect Yourself

We, as citizens, place a great deal of trust in the financial advisors who are tasked with helping us achieve and maintain financial security. Most of the time financial advisors and stockbrokers are honest folks who work diligently in their client’s best interests. However, on occasion financial advisors and the brokerage firms who employ them mess up and cause serious financial harm to their clients. Sometimes these losses are caused by simple negligence. Other times fraud or other serious misconduct is to blame.

Here are 5 signs that your broker needs to be reported –

• Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, certain investment professionals, known as registered investment advisors (RIAs), owe fiduciary obligations to their customers. Your investment broker must always look out for your best interests. If you lost money because of your broker’s breach of fiduciary duty, you may be entitled to compensation for the full value of your damages.
• Unsuitable Investments: Many financial advisors are not fiduciaries. Instead, they are held to the suitability standard. These stockbrokers and financial advisors can only sell and recommend financial products that are appropriate for a customer’s unique investment profile. If you lost money in unsuitable investments, you should consider reporting them.
• Material Misrepresentations or Omissions: Brokers have a duty to make fair and honest representations to their clients. If they fail to do so, and an investor loses money due to a misrepresentation or a material omission, the broker may be liable for the investor’s losses.
• Lack of Diversification: Brokers must also act with the appropriate level of professional skill. Pushing a customer into over-concentrated investments is highly risky. Brokers can be held liable for losses sustained because of an investor’s inappropriate lack of diversification.
• Excessive Trading (Churning): Stockbrokers and financial advisors must have a well-grounded, reasonable basis to execute all trades. Unfortunately, there are cases in which brokers will frequently trade on a customer’s account, simply to increase their own fees. This unlawful practice is known as churning.
• Unauthorized Trading: Brokers must have the proper legal authority to make transactions on behalf of a client. If you lost money because your broker made trades that you never approved of, you may have been the victim of unauthorized trading. You should consult with an experienced attorney.

Report Michael Murphy

In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.

Michael Patrick Murphy – and the firm that employs this broker – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). FINRA provides an online form to allow investors to file a formal complaint against their financial advisor, stockbroker, or brokerage firm.

Click here to go to FINRA’s Online Complaint Form →

This form will ask you for specific information related to your complaint. Be prepared by gathering the following:

• Name and symbol for the investment product in question.
• The CRD number (2596905) for the broker – Michael Patrick Murphy
• Your complete contact information.

Remember, it is advised to report your broker to FINRA, only after you have exhausted all of your other remedies and carefully prepared a compelling complaint.  Once you file a complaint against your broker at FINRA, your case will be bound by FINRA’s rules and the arbitration panel’s eventual decision. The time clock will start, and your complaint will be served on your broker or broker-dealer.

The views and opinions expressed in these articles are those of the source BROKERCOMPLAINTS.COM and do not necessarily reflect the official position of ‘FraudHalt.com’, which shall not be held liable for any inaccuracies presented. The information provided within this article is for general informational purposes only. While we try to keep the information up-to-date and correct, there are no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability of the information in this article for any purpose.

This article is syndicated automatically through a third-party agency from BROKERCOMPLAINTS.COM.

To view the original article at BROKERCOMPLAINTS.COM, you can visit https://brokercomplaints.com/report/michael-patrick-murphy/.