Robert Edwin Mcbride Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Robert Edwin Mcbride  – 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 Robert Edwin Mcbride.

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

About Robert Mcbride

Robert Edwin Mcbride is an Investment Adviser. Robert Edwin Mcbride’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 1195514 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1195514.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Robert Edwin Mcbride.

Robert Edwin Mcbride 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 Robert Edwin Mcbride’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 6/23/2003
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: C8A030051
• DocketNumberAAO: 8030051
• Initiated By: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC.
• Allegations: NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110, 3010(A), 3010(B), AND 3110 – RESPONDENT MCBRIDE FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE A SUPERVISORY SYSTEM AND WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS, AND WITH THE APPLICABLE RULES OF THE NASD REGARDING: (A) THE PROCEDURES REQUIRED THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNATED SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEE (DSE) OR BRANCH MANAGER BEFORE THE SALE OF RESTRICTED STOCK, BEFORE ASSOCIATED PERSONS OF THE MEMBER COULD OPEN AN ACCOUNT WITH OTHER NASD MEMBERS, BEFORE REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVES ( R) COULD DIRECT CUSTOMERS TO INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES THAT WERE NOT SPONSORED BY THE MEMBER, BUT THE PROCEDURES DESIGNATED AN INDIVIDUALS AS DSE WHO WAS NOT FUNCTIONING IN THAT CAPACITY, AND DID NOT IDENTIFY THE PERSON WHO HAD RESPONSIBILITY FOR FUNCTIONING IN THE CAPACITY OF DSE OR BRANCH MANAGER; (B) MCBRIDE KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT A RR WAS PARTICIPATING IN THE SALE OF RESTRICTED STOCK WITHOUT THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF ANY SUPERVISORY PRINCIPAL AT THE MEMBER; (C) MCBRIDE KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THE MEMBER’S RR HAD OPENED ACCOUNTS AT OTHER NASD MEMBERS WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OF ANY SUPERVISORY PRINCIPAL AT THE MEMBER; AND (D) PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS, IN THAT THE PROCEDURES FAILED TO DEFINE WHAT WAS MEAN BY DIRECTING CUSTOMERS OR SPONSORED BY THE FIRM; AND THE SUPERVISORY SYSTEM WAS SUCH THAT MCBRIDE KNEW OF SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THE MEMBER’S RR WERE IN FACT DIRECTING CUSTOMERS TO INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES THAT WERE NOT SPONSORED BY THE FIRM AND PARTICIPATING IN PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OF ANY SUPERVISORY PRINCIPAL AT THE MEMBER. IN ADDITION, MCBRIDE FAILED TO ENFORCE THE MEMBER’S WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REGARDING PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS BY PERMITTING RR TO EFFECT THE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS OFF THE BOOKS AND RECORDS OF THE MEMBER.
• Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar
• Sanction Details: WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, RESPONDENT MCBRIDE CONSENTED TO THE DESCRIBED SANCTION AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS; THEREFORE, HE IS BARRED FROM ACTING IN ANY PRINCIPAL OR SUPERVISORY CAPACITY WITH ANY NASD MEMBER.

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 9/7/2001
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: C8A010059
• DocketNumberAAO: 8010059
• Initiated By: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC.
• Allegations: NASD RULES 1031, 2110, 2210, 2220 AND 3070 – RESPONDENT PERMITTED THE DISTRIBUTION OF SEVERAL SALES LITERATURE IN THE FORM OF FORM LETTERS USED IN SOLICITATIONS FOR SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WHICH WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE PRINCIPAL OF HIS MEMBER FIRM. THE NASD ALSO ALLEGES THAT SALES LITERATURE CONTAINING SOLICITATIONS FOR SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS: WERE NOT SUBMITTED TO THE ADVERTISING/INVESTMENT COMPANIES REGULATION DEPARTMENT OF THE NASD WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THEIR FIRST USE; FAILED TO INCLUDE THE FULL ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF THE MEMBER FIRM’S REGISTERED BRANCH OFFICE OR OFFICE OF SUPERVISORY JURISDICTION (OSJ) RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPERVISION OF THE PROPOSED TRAING ACTIVITY; WHICH OMITTED MATERIAL FACTS AND OBSCURED ESSENTIAL INFORMATION RESULTING IN MISLEADING PRESENTATION; WHICH CONTAINED EXAGGERATED, UNWARRANTED OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS OR CLAIMS AND FAILED TO REFLECT THE RISKS OF A FLUCTUATING MARKET; FAILED TO DISCLOSE, IN DISCUSSING DOLLAR COST AVERAGING, THAT PLAN DOES NOT ASSURE A PROFIT, DOES NOT PROTECT AGAINST LOSS IN DECLINING MARKETS, AND IDENTIFIED PURCHASES OF STOCK, WHICH IS IMPROPER IN OPTION EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL; FAILED TO DISCLOSE THAT OPTIONS MIGHT NOT BE A SUITABLE TYPE OF INVESTMENT FOR INVESTOR; FAILED TO CONTAIN A COMPLETE EXPLANATION OF THE RISKS OF DAY TRADING, WHICH INCLUDE MARKET VOLATILITY, POTENTIAL DELAY IN TRADE EXECUTION AND LOSS OF CAPITAL. RESPONDENT PERMITTED AN INDIVIDUAL TO ENGAGE IN SECURITIES BUSINESS AND TO FUNCTION AS A REPRESENTATIVE AND PLACE SECURITIES TRANSACTION WHILE HE WAS NOT EFFECTIVELY REGISTERED WITH THE NASD MEMBER. THE RESPONDENT ALSO FAILED TO REPORT TO NASD REGULATION, INC. STATISTICAL AND SUMMARY INFORMATION RELATING TO AN AGGREGATE TOTAL OF SIX CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS, FROM CUSTOMERS OF THE MEMBER, AGAINST VARIOUS REPRESENTATIVES RECEIVED BY THE MEMBER DURING THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 1997, THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH QUARTERS OF 1998, AND THE SECOND QUARTER OF 1999.
• Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Monetary/Fine
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $15,500.00 Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details: A SUSPENSION FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY NASD MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR 30 BUSINESS DAYS AND A FINE OF $15,500.00. THE FINE SHALL BE DUE AND PAYABLE EITHER PRIOR TO REASSOCIATION WITH A MEMBER FIRM FOLLOWING THE 30 BUSINESS DAY SUSPENSION, OR PRIOR TO ANY APPLICATION OR REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ANY STATUTORY DISQUALIFICATION RESULTING FROM THIS OR ANY OTHER EVENT OR PROCEEDING, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. ** THE SUSPENSION SHALL BEGIN WITH THE OPENING OF BUSINESS ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2001 AND END AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2001.

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 10/25/1999
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: C8A990074
• DocketNumberAAO: 8990074
• Initiated By: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC.
• Allegations: 11/09/99GS: COMPLAINT NO. C8A990074 FILED OCTOBER 25, 1999 BY DISTRICT NO. 8 AGAINST ROBERT E. MCBRIDE ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF NASD RULES 1031, 2110, 2330(E) AND 3010 IN THAT AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, IN THE ACCOUNTS OF PUBLIC CUSTOMERS; GUARANTEED A CUSTOMER AGAINST LOSSES IN THE CUSTOMER’S ACCOUNT, FAILED TO RESPOND TO NASD REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION MADE PURSUANT TO NASD RULE 8210, AND CONDUCTED SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WHILE FAILING TO BE REGISTERED IN THE APPROPRIATE CAPACITY; AND, A MEMBER FIRM, ACTING THROUGH RESPONDENT MCBRIDE, FAILED TO ENFORCE SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES AND FAILED TO REASONABLY SUPERVISE RESPONDENT MICHELSON WITH A VIEW TO ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE WITH THE NASD’S REGISTRATION REGULATIONS.
• Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Monetary/Fine
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $10,000.00
• Sanctions: FINED $10,000, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY.
• Sanction Details: 10-03-00, $10,000 PAID J&S ON 5/25/00, INVOICE 00-8A-339
• Broker Comment: LETTER OF SETTLEMENT IMPOSING CONSENT TO STATEMENT OF FACTS AND THE IMPOSITION OF THE ABOVE FINE (JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY) WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE NASD ON MAY 8, 2000.

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.

• D H BRUSH & ASSOCIATES, INC. (CRD#: 3667) :: 5/18/1992 – 6/26/2001 :: CHICAGO, IL
• ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO. INCORPORATED (CRD#: 8158) :: 7/1/1988 – 10/3/1991 :: MILWAUKEE, WI
• BUYS-MACGREGOR, MACNAUGHTON- GREENAWALT & CO. (CRD#: 7304) :: 4/26/1988 – 7/1/1988
• STIFEL, NICOLAUS & COMPANY, INCORPORATED (CRD#: 793) :: 11/23/1983 – 4/16/1988

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 Robert Edwin Mcbride, 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 Robert Mcbride

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

Robert Edwin Mcbride – 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 (1195514) for the broker – Robert Edwin Mcbride
• 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 ‘Complaints Bureau,’ 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/robert-edwin-mcbride/.