Tejbir Singh Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Tejbir Singh  – 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 Tejbir Singh.

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

About Tejbir Singh

Tejbir Singh is an Investment Adviser. Tejbir Singh’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 2801400 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/2801400.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Tejbir Singh.

Tejbir Singh 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 Tejbir Singh’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 1/28/2020
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
• Initiated By: Connecticut
• Allegations: On January 28, 2020, the Banking Commissioner issued an Order to Cease and Desist, Order to Make Restitution, Notice of Intent to Fine and Notice of Right to Hearing (Docket No. CRF-20-8480-S)) against Native American Energy Group, Inc. of 61-43 186th Street, Suite 507, Fresh Meadows, New York 11365. The corporation is a purported development stage company specializing in oil, natural gas and alternative energy systems. Also named in the action were Joseph Gatano D’Arrigo, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of the company, Raj S. Nanvaan, the company’s Chief Financial Officer, and J.R. Bautista, Jr., a company consultant. Bautista had been the subject of a January 17, 1990 agency Consent Order based on allegations of unregistered agent activity. That Consent Order resulted in an eighteen month bar being imposed against Bautista. The current action alleged that respondents Native American Energy Group, Inc. and Bautista violated Section 36b-16 of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act by selling unregistered common shares of the company to at least one Connecticut investor. The action also alleged that the all respondents violated the antifraud provisions in Section 36b-4(a) of the Act by failing to disclose to the affected investor that the investment proceeds were actually being wired out to respondents D’Arrigo, Nanvaan and Bautista rather than being used to invest in oil or gas investments.
• Resolution: Order
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $100,000.00
• Sanctions: Since respondent Nanvaan failed to request a hearing on the allegations, the Order to Cease and Desist and Order to Make Restitution became permanent as to him on February 23, 2020. Nanvaan also did not request a hearing on the Notice of Intent to Fine. Finding that Nanvaan violated the antifraud provisions in Section 36b-4(a) of the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act, the Commissioner imposed a $100,000 fine by default against Nanvaan on March 13, 2020.

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 6/20/2005
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
• Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
• Allegations: SEC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING RELEASE NO. 34-51886 DATED JUNE 20, 2005; ON MARCH 29, 2003, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, IN THE CIVIL ACTION ENTITLED SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION V. RENAISSANCE CAPITAL CORPORATION, ET. AL, 00 CIV. 1848 (E.D.N.Y.) (INJUNCTIVE ACTION), ENTERED A FINAL JUDGMENT AGAINST TEJBIR SINGH (SINGH OR ESPONDENT), WHICH PERMANENTLY ENJOINED HIM FROM FUTURE VIOLATIONS OF SECTIONS 5(A), 5(C), AND 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 (SECURITIES ACT), AND SECTION 10(B) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT AND RULE 10B-5 THEREUNDER. IN THE INJUNCTIVE ACTION, THE COMMISSION’S COMPLAINT ALLEGED (A) THAT FROM AT LEAST OCTOBER 1997 TO AT LEAST MARCH 1999, RESPONDENT INDUCED THE INVESTING PUBLIC TO BUY AT LEAST $2.4 MILLION WORTH OF SHARES OF STOCK (THE STOCK) ISSUED BY A NOW-DEFUNCT NEW YORK CORPORATION (THE CORPORATION) THAT WAS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING SWEATERS; (B) THAT RESPONDENT SOLICITED INVESTORS THROUGH A SERIES OF FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS INCLUDING, INTER ALIA, THAT THE CORPORATION WOULD BE IMMINENTLY CONDUCTING AN IPO AND INVESTORS COULD RESELL THEIR PRIVATE PLACEMENT SHARES AT A SUBSTANTIAL PROFIT; AND (C) THAT RESPONDENT DISTRIBUTED OFFERING MEMORANDA TO INVESTORS EVEN THOUGH RESPONDENT KNEW OR WERE RECKLESS IN NOT KNOWING THAT THE OFFERING MEMORANDA CONTAINED MATERIAL MISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS. THE COMMISSION’S COMPLAINT CHARGED THAT THE RESPONDENT VIOLATED SECTIONS 5 AND 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT AND SECTION 10(B) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.
• Resolution: Order
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar
• Sanction Details: SINGH HAS SUBMITTED AN OFFER OF SETTLEMENT (OFFER) IN THIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING, WHICH THE COMMISSION HAS DETERMINED TO ACCEPT, WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE RESPONDENT CONSENTS TO THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER MAKING FINDINGS AND IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 (ORDER). IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, THE COMMISSION DEEMS IT APPROPRIATE AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO IMPOSE THE SANCTIONS AGREED TO IN THE OFFER. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(B)(6) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT, RESPONDENT BE, AND HEREBY IS, BARRED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY BROKER OR DEALER.

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 3/30/2000
• Disclosure Type: Civil
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
• Allegations: THE SEC ANNOUNCED THAT IT FILED A COMPLAINT ON MARCH 30 IN THE COURT CHARGING FIVE INDIVIDUALS INCLUDING TEJBIR SINGH AND TWO ENTITIES WITH HAVING DEFRAUDED AT LEAST 89 INVESTORS OF MORE THAN $2.4 MILLION THROUGH THE SALE OF UNREGISTERED COMMON STOCK. THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT FROM AT LEAST OCTOBER 1997 TO AT LEAST MARCH 1999, THE FIVE INDIVIDUALS THROUGH TWO COMPANIES (COLLECTIVELY, DEFENDANTS), CONDUCTED A FRAUDULENT PRIVATE PLACEMENT OF UNREGISTERED STOCK. THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT, AMONG OTHER THINGS, DEFENDANTS FALSELY REPRESENTED THAT INVESTORS WOULD BE ABLE TO SELL THEIR SHARES FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PROFIT IN AN IMMINENT INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING (IPO) BY THE COMPANY, THAT THE COMPANY PROJECTED SUBSTANTIAL AND GROWING FUTURE REVENUES, AND THAT THE PROCEEDS OF THE SALE OF STOCK WOULD BE PAID TO THE COMPANY. THE DEFENDANTS VIOLATED THE ANTIFRAUD PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN SECTION 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 (SECURITIES ACT) AND SECTION 10(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 (EXCHANGE ACT) AND RULE 10B-5. IN ADDITION, THE SEC ALLEGES THAT DEFENDANTS VIOLATED THE REGISTRATION PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN SECTIONS 5(A) AND 5(C) OF THE SECURITIES ACT BY UNLAWFULLY SELLING UNREGISTERED STOCK.
• Resolution: Judgment Rendered
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Monetary/Fine
• Sanction Details :: Amount: $10,000.00 Sanctions: Disgorgement/Restitution Sanctions: Cease and Desist/Injunction
• Sanction Details: SEC LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 18075, DATED APRIL 7, 2003; ON MARCH 24, 2003, A JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION IN AN ENFORCEMENT ACTION ARISING OUT OF THE FRAUDULENT OFFER AND SALE OF SECURITIES. IN ITS ORDER, THE COURT FOUND THAT THE THREE REMAINING DEFENDANTS IN THE ACTION, INCLUDING TEJBIR SINGH, ARE LIABLE FOR VIOLATING ANTIFRAUD AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. IN GRANTING THE COMMISSION’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, THE COURT PERMANENTLY ENJOINED EACH OF THE REMAINING DEFENDANTS FROM FUTURE VIOLATIONS OF THE ANTIFRAUD AND REGISTRATION PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS SPECIFICALLY SECTIONS 5(A), 5(C), AND 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 AND SECTION 10(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND RULE 10B-5 THEREUNDER. THE COURT ALSO ORDERED THAT THE REMAINING DEFENDANTS PAY CIVIL PENALTIES, AND THAT THE REMAINING AND RELIEF DEFENDANTS DISGORGE ILL-GOTTEN GAINS PLUS PREJUDGMENT INTEREST, IN AMOUNTS TO BE DETERMINED BY A MAGISTRATE JUDGE . THE JUDGE HAS SCHEDULED A HEARING ON MAY 5, 2003 TO DETERMINE THE DISGORGEMENT, PRE-JUDGMENT INTEREST AND CIVIL PENALTY AMOUNTS. SEC LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 34-50348 DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 2004; ON OCTOBER 31, 2003, THE DISTRICT COURT ORDERED SINGH TO DISGORGE $10,000.00 OF ILL-GOTTEN GAINS DERIVED FROM HIS FRAUDULENT CONDUCT, PLUS $4,273.26 IN PRE-JUDGMENT INTEREST, AND ORDERED HIM TO PAY A $10,000.00 CIVIL PENALTY.

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.

• BAXTER BANKS & SMITH, LTD. (CRD#: 40771) :: 11/25/1998 – 4/6/2000 :: ST. PETERSBURG, FL
• LLOYD WADE SECURITIES INC. (CRD#: 39653) :: 3/11/1998 – 6/30/1998 :: DALLAS, TX

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 Tejbir Singh, 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 Tejbir Singh

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

Tejbir Singh – 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 (2801400) for the broker – Tejbir Singh
• 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/tejbir-singh/.