Timothy Burke Ruggiero Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Timothy Burke Ruggiero  – 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 Timothy Burke Ruggiero.

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

About Timothy Ruggiero

Timothy Burke Ruggiero is an Investment Adviser. Timothy Burke Ruggiero’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 2119642 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/2119642.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Timothy Burke Ruggiero.

Timothy Burke Ruggiero 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 Timothy Burke Ruggiero’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 9/25/2012
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 2008011675301
• DocketNumberAAO: 2008011675301
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 SECTIONS 10(B), 17A-3, SEC RULES 10B-5, 17A-3, SEC REGULATION M RULE 101, FINRA RULE 2120, NASD RULES 2110, 2120, 3010, 3110, 3110(A), – TIMOTHY RUGGIERO ASSISTED PRIVATE COMPANIES IN GOING PUBLIC BY REVERSE MORTGAGES WITH PUBLICLY-HELD SHELL CORPORATIONS. DURING THE PERIOD OF A PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC EQUITY (PIPE)OFFERING FOR OVER-THE-COUNTER (OTC) BULLETIN BOARD SECURITIES, RUGGIERO ENTERED SECURITIES PURCHASES AND LIMIT ORDERS THAT MANIPULATED THE PRICE OF BOTH STOCKS. BECAUSE RUGGIERO CONTROLLED THE MEMBER FIRM THAT WAS THE PLACEMENT AGENT FOR A PIPE OFFERING, HE STOOD TO BENEFIT FROM PLACEMENT FEES, STOCK AND WARRANTS IF THE PIPE WAS SUCCESSFUL. RUGGIERO’S ORDERS AND PURCHASES ARTIFICIALLY GENERATED INCREASES IN THE INSIDE BID PRICE WHICH SENT FALSE OR MISLEADING SIGNALS TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS BY CREATING THE ILLUSION THAT THE MARKET PLACED A HIGHER VALUE ON THE STOCK, MISLEADING INVESTORS INTO PURCHASING SHARES VIA THE PIPE OFFERING. RUGGIERO WAS ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN AND RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THESE ORDERS. AS THE FIRM’S CEO, RUGGIERO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FIRM’S ROLE IN PROCESSING AND SUBMITTING THESE ORDERS. THE FIRM’S LIMIT ORDERS ARTIFICIALLY GENERATED INCREASES IN THE INSIDE BID PRICE FOR SHARES. THESE LIMIT ORDERS SENT FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION TO THE MARKETPLACE BECAUSE THEY RAISED THE INSIDE BID PRICE AT WHICH SHARES COULD BE PURCHASED AND MADE IT APPEAR THAT THE MARKET PLACED A HIGHER VALUE ON THE SHARES AND THAT IT WOULD BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO PURCHASE SHARES VIA THE PIPE OFFERING. DURING THE PERIOD WHEN DISTRIBUTION PARTICIPANTS IN A SECURITIES OFFERING ARE PROHIBITED FROM TRADING IN THAT SECURITY, RUGGIERO VIOLATED REGULATION M BY SOLICITING LIMIT ORDERS AND PROCESSING STOCK PURCHASES SOLICITED BY FIRM PERSONNEL FOR TWO PIPES. RUGGIERO FAILED TO MAKE AND PRESERVE RECORDS OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO HIS FIRM’S BUSINESS AND TO DOCUMENT HIS REVIEW OF EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE. RUGGIERO PERSISTENTLY FAILED TO ASSURE HIS FIRM INSTALLED AND EMPLOYED EMAIL SYSTEMS THAT CAPTURED AND PRESERVED FIRM COMMUNICATIONS. RUGGIERO FAILED TO ENSURE THAT THE FIRM EMPLOYED A NON-ERASABLE AND NON-REWRITABLE FORMAT TO RETAIN EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE. THE FIRM’S WRITTEN PROCEDURES ON ELECTRONIC CORRESPONDENCE REQUIRED PRIOR APPROVAL FOR ELECTRONIC MESSAGES, REVIEW OF INCOMING EMAIL BEFORE DELIVERY, AND A PRINCIPAL’S REVIEW AND WRITTEN ENDORSEMENT OF ALL CORRESPONDENCE OF ASSOCIATED PERSONS PERTAINING TO SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS. RUGGIERO DID NOT FOLLOW THESE PROCEDURES. HE ONLY PERFORMED SPOT-CHECK REVIEWS AND DID NOT MAINTAIN DOCUMENTATION OF THESE REVIEWS, CAUSING HIS FIRM TO CREATE AND MAINTAIN INACCURATE BOOKS AND RECORDS IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 17(A) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND SEC RULES 17A-3, 17A-4. RUGGIERO FAILED TO SUPERVISE TRADING AT THE FIRM; HE FAILED TO APPROPRIATELY REVIEW AND APPROVE TRANSACTIONS AND TRADING ACTIVITIES TO PREVENT THE FIRM FROM MANIPULATING THE PRICE OF SECURITIES FOR WHICH THE FIRM WAS CONDUCTING OFFERINGS, PREVENT THE FIRM AND ITS REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVES FROM IMPROPERLY SOLICITING AND PURCHASING LIMIT ORDERS DURING RESTRICTED OFFERING PERIODS AND FAILED TO SUPERVISE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AT THE FIRM BY FAILING TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS, REGULATONS, AND BY FAILING TO ENFORCE THE FIRM’S WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES. RUGGIERO’S FIRM FILED A FORM U4 TO REFLECT A RETIRED SENIOR REGISTERED OPTIONS PRINCIPAL’S (SROP) RETURN TO WORK AT THE FIRM AS A FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL (FINOP) AND ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, RUGGIERO APPLIED THE INDIVIDUAL’S PURPORTED INITIALS TO OPTIONS ORDER TICKETS TO EVIDENCE HIS SUPPOSED REVIEW OF THESE RECORDS, THEREBY CREATING RECORDS THAT GAVE THE FALSE APPEARANCE THAT THEY HAD BEEN DULY REVIEWED BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL IN VIOLATION OF HIS FIRM’S OBLIGATION UNDER SECTION 17(A) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT AND SEC RULE 17A-3.
• Resolution: Decision
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar (Permanent)
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: All Capacities
• Duration: Indefinite
• Start Date: 2/18/2014
• Regulator Statement: EXTENDED HEARING PANEL DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 31, 2013 WHEREIN RESPONDENT IS BARRED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR ENGAGING IN A STOCK PRICE MANIPULATION IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 10(B) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT, AND RULE 10B-5 THEREUNDER, AND IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2120 AND 2110; UNLAWFULLY TRADING IN STOCK DURING THE RESTRICTED PERIODS FOR TWO OFFERINGS, IN VIOLATION OF RULE 101 OF REGULATION M UNDER THE EXCHANGE ACT AND NASD CONDUCT RULE 2110; AND FORGING INITIALS ON ORDER TICKETS TO EVIDENCE SUPERVISORY REVIEW OF OPTIONS TRANSACTIONS, IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 3110(A) AND 2110. IN LIGHT OF THE BAR, NO ADDITIONAL SANCTIONS ARE IMPOSED FOR RUGGIERO’S FAILURE TO RETAIN ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS, IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 3110 AND 2110; AND SUPERVISE HIS FIRM’S TRADING AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS, IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 3010 AND 2110. RUGGIERO IS ALSO ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE PROCEEDING IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $9,682.36. THIS DECISION INCLUDES A FINDING THAT RUGGIERO VIOLATED SECTION 10(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULE 10B-5. DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 18, 2014.

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 8/27/2012
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 08-04465
• DocketNumberAAO: 08-04465
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: RESPONDENT RUGGIERO FAILED TO PAY ARBITRATION FEES ASSESSED IN FINRA ARBITRATION CASE #08-04465.
• Resolution: LETTER
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ANY CAPACITY
• Duration: N/A
• Start Date: 9/17/2012
• Regulator Statement: PURSUANT TO FINRA RULE 9553, RESPONDENT RUGGIERO’S REGISTRATION WITH FINRA IS SUSPENDED SEPTEMBER 17, 2012 FOR FAILURE TO PAY ARBITRATION FEES.

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 12/16/2011
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 08-00632
• DocketNumberAAO: 08-00632
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: RESPONDENT TIMOTHY RUGGIERO FAILED TO PAY ARBITRATION FEES ASSESSED IN FINRA ARBITRATION CASE 08-00632.
• Resolution: LETTER
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ANY CAPACITY
• Duration: N/A
• Start Date: 1/10/2012
• Regulator Statement: PURSUANT TO FINRA RULE 9553, RESPONDENT TIMOTHY RUGGIERO’S REGISTRATION WITH FINRA IS SUSPENDED JANUARY 10, 2012 FOR FAILURE TO PAY ARBITRATION FEES.

DISCLOSURE 4 – 

• Event Date: 11/29/2011
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 08-00632
• DocketNumberAAO: 08-00632
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: RESPONDENT RUGGIERO FAILED TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO A FINRA REQUEST TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE.
• Resolution: LETTER
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ANY CAPACITY
• Duration: N/A
• Start Date: 11/29/2011
• Regulator Statement: PURSUANT TO ARTICLE VI, SECTION 3 OF FINRA BY-LAWS, AND FINRA RULE 9554, RESPONDENT RUGGIERO IS SUSPENDED NOVEMBER 29, 2011 FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO A FINRA REQUEST TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE.
• Broker Comment: BROOKSHIRE AND RUGGIERO ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WAS PAID IN FULL, HOWEVER THE ARBITRATION PANEL LATER ORDERED RUGGIERO TO PAY AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT (WHICH WAS NEARLY 3 TIMES THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF DAMAGES CLAIMED) FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE AGREEMENT ON TIME. THE AMOUNT WAS SO EGREGIOUS, MR. RUGGIERO HAS BEEN UNABLE TO PAY.

DISCLOSURE 5 – 

• Event Date: 1/11/2010
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 08-00632
• DocketNumberAAO: 08-00632
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: RESPONDENT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO A FINRA REQUEST TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE.
• Resolution: LETTER
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ALL CAPACITIES
• Duration: N/A
• Start Date: 1/11/2010
• End Date: 7/7/2011
• Regulator Statement: PURSUANT TO ARTICLE VI, SECTION 3 OF FINRA BY-LAWS, AND FINRA RULE 9554, RESPONDENT’S FINRA REGISTRATION IS SUSPENDED JANUARY 11, 2010 FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO FINRA REQUESTS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE. SUSPENSION LIFTED ON JULY 7, 2011.
• Broker Comment: BROOKSHIRE AND RUGGIERO ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WAS PAID IN FULL, HOWEVER THE ARBITRATION PANEL ORDERED RUGGIERO TO PAY AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT (WHICH WAS NEARLY THREE TIMES THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF DAMAGES CLAIMED) FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE AGREEMENT ON TIME.THE SUSPENSION WAS LIFTED ON JULY 7, 2011.

DISCLOSURE 6 – 

• Event Date: 12/17/2009
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 07-03558
• DocketNumberAAO: 07-03558
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: RUGGIERO FAILED TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO A FINRA REQUEST TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE.
• Resolution: LETTER
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ALL CAPACITIES
• Duration: N/A
• Start Date: 12/17/2009
• End Date: 4/6/2011
• Regulator Statement: PURSUANT TO ARTICLE VI, SECTION 3 OF FINRA BY-LAWS, AND FINRA RULE 9554, RUGGIERO’S FINRA REGISTRATION IS SUSPENDED DECEMBER 17, 2009 FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ARBITRATION AWARD OR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OR TO SATISFACTORILY RESPOND TO FINRA REQUESTS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE. SUSPENSION LIFTED APRIL 6, 2011.
• Broker Comment: SETTLEMENT AMOUNT HAS BEEN PAID IN FULL

DISCLOSURE 7 – 

• Event Date: 3/18/2008
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Award / Judgment
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, NEGLIGENCE
• Damage Amount Requested: $78,000.00
• Damages Granted: $182,468.14
• Arbitration Docket Number: 08-00632
• Regulator Statement: The Award has not been paid.
• Broker Comment: BROOKSHIRE PAID CLAIMANT THE FULL SETTLEMENT AMOUNT PRIOR TO THE ARBITRATION HEARING, BUT THE PANEL DISREGARDED AND AWARDED CLAIMANT NEARLY 3 TIMES WHAT HER ALLEGED DAMAGES WERE.

DISCLOSURE 8 – 

• Event Date: 2/24/2004
• Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
• Disclosure Resolution: Award / Judgment
• Disclosure Detail :: Allegations: CUSTOMER, A CUSTOMER/PART-OWNER OF BROOKSHIRE, AFTER ADMITTEDLY MAKING IN EXCESS OF $10 MILLION IN PROFITS AND AFTER ALMOST DAILY CONTACT WITH THE FIRM CONCERNING HIS AGGRESSIVE TRADING PRACTICES, ASSERTS, IN A MERITLOUS ARBITRATION CLAIM, THAT TRADES WHICH HE ENTERED WERE EXCESSIVE AND UNSUITABLE. NOT CONTENT WITH THE SUBSTANTIAL PROFITS, THE CLAIMANT, WHO PAID NO COMMISSIONS, ON MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF AUTHORIZED TRADES, SEEKS TO RECOUP LOSSES RESULTING FROM HIS OWN INVESTMENT DECISIONS. WE ARE VIGOROUSLY DEFENDING THIS CLAIM AND ANTICIPATE A JUDGEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE FIRM AND ITS RESPONDENTS AND AWARDED ITS LEGAL FEES AND OTHER ARBITRATION COSTS. PRIOR TO THIS ACTION, TIMOTHY B. RUGGIERO HAS NEVER BEEN NAMED IN ANY OTHER ARBITRATIONS.
• Damage Amount Requested: $1,000,000.00
• Damages Granted: $1,000,000.00
• Arbitration Docket Number: 01-03090

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.

• BROOKSHIRE SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 44347) :: 5/20/1998 – 3/26/2009 :: FT. LAUDERDALE, FL
• HAMPSHIRE SECURITIES CORPORATION (CRD#: 19725) :: 9/18/1995 – 2/24/1997 :: NEW YORK, NY
• JOSEPHTHAL LYON & ROSS INCORPORATED (CRD#: 3227) :: 12/22/1993 – 10/10/1995 :: NEW YORK, NY
• A.S. GOLDMEN & CO., INC. (CRD#: 23180) :: 3/26/1993 – 1/6/1994 :: RED BANK, NJ
• M.S. FARRELL & COMPANY, INC. (CRD#: 24232) :: 3/16/1992 – 2/19/1993 :: SYOSSET, NY
• PARAGON CAPITAL CORPORATION (CRD#: 18555) :: 12/3/1991 – 3/19/1992 :: EAST HANOVER, NJ
• JOSEPHTHAL LYON & ROSS INCORPORATED (CRD#: 3227) :: 7/22/1991 – 12/14/1991 :: NEW YORK, NY
• D. H. BLAIR & CO., INC. (CRD#: 6833) :: 5/9/1991 – 7/15/1991 :: 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 Timothy Burke Ruggiero, 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 Timothy Ruggiero

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

Timothy Burke Ruggiero – 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 (2119642) for the broker – Timothy Burke Ruggiero
• 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/timothy-burke-ruggiero/.