FINRA Panel Grants Expungements Of Groundless Forgery Allegation

• Case Outcome: The FINRA Panel unanimously granted a full expungement, ruling the customer’s claim was "factually false" and "erroneous."
• The Allegation: A retired client falsely accused a 24-year veteran advisor of forging a signature on a $1M annuity application following a period of post-purchase remorse.
• Respondent Firm: Edward Jones (settled the initial claim for $19,920 as a cost-saving measure without the advisor’s consent).
• Key Evidence: Original annuity applications, suitability reviews, and regular client correspondence proved the client was fully informed and the signatures were authentic.
• Legal Standard: Relief was granted under FINRA Rule 2080, confirming the information has no regulatory value and provides no protection to the investing public.
• Representative: Successfully argued by Alex Padla, J.D., and Dochtor Kennedy, Esq. of AdvisorLaw.

A financial advisor in Minnesota with a 24-year unblemished career faced a single, unwarranted customer complaint stemming from post-purchase remorse. The 2024 dispute falsely accused him of forging a signature on an annuity application. Supported by AdvisorLaw, the advisor pursued FINRA arbitration to expunge the deceptive blemish from his record. 

The advisor launched his distinguished career in June 2001. In 2021, he welcomed a client following the division of a family trust. The client was a retired farmer in his late 70s with substantial investment savvy, a liquid net worth exceeding $3M, and total assets over $12M. Initially geared toward land acquisition, the client’s profile featured high risk tolerance for securities, low for CDs, strong liquidity requirements, and a one-to-three-year investment time horizon. He held vast farmland, equities, and CDs. 

Drawing on the client’s objectives, the advisor crafted a diversified portfolio. He spoke with the client regularly to ensure that the portfolio was aligned with the client’s investor profile. In December 2022, amid rising brokerage CD rates, the client transferred $1M in CDs to the firm. By 2023, as CD yields waned, the advisor and the client discussed alternatives to CDs, such as municipal bonds and fixed annuities. After thorough reviews—including suitability checks with field supervision—the advisor recommended a seven-year, fixed annuity with a return of 5.5%. The client received prospectus that explained the terms, risks, fees, and benefits, and he signed agreements in December 2023. There was no forgery whatsoever involved in the client’s annuity purchase. 

The advisor departed Edward Jones in November 2024. In December, the client alleged that the advisor had forged his signature on the annuity paperwork, and he demanded $547,000. Edward Jones settled for $19,920 in March 2025, as a cost-saving measure and without the advisor’s input. 

This isolated disclosure marred the advisor’s otherwise-clear CRD and BrokerCheck records without providing any investor safeguard. 

The advisor initiated expungement proceedings in June 2025. Edward Jones responded neutrally in July. The client, duly served, abstained from the hearing. The three-arbitrator Panel convened via videoconference in December 2025, in Minneapolis. Evaluating testimony, exhibits like annuity applications and correspondence, and settlement details, the Panel unanimously approved relief under FINRA Rule 2080. As articulated in the award: “The claim, allegation, or information is false.” Elaborating, “The Customer’s complaint had allegations that were clearly different from what was in the exhibits presented. The Customer’s complaint is therefore erroneous. The Panel finds Claimant highly credible. The Customer did not respond in any way, despite receiving multiple notifications well in advance of the hearing.” 

Facing a similar situation? Contact our team today for a complimentary consultation to evaluate your case. Our experts will assess the viability of expungement and guide you through the process.