Erez Law is currently investigating former Metlife Securities Inc. financial advisor Bryan Anderson (CRD# 3116269), who is currently serving seven years in federal prison for running a Ponzi scheme. Anderson was registered with Pruco Securities, LLC in Birmingham, Alabama from February to October 2012 before he was terminated regarding, “Registered representative provided a company letter to a client that had been altered to misstate the guarantees associated with a variable universal life policy, and provided a letter misstating its potential tax consequences that had not been submitted to the firm for supervisory review. Allegations confirmed.” Previously, he was registered with Metlife Securities Inc. in Birmingham, Alabama from 1998 to 2012.
In August 2017, Anderson pled guilty to one count of wire fraud, one count of money laundering, and one count of securities fraud. Anderson was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of seven years and three months to be followed by three years of supervised release and directed to pay restitution of $3,063,014 to 12 victims who he persuaded to invest $6.7 million in a stock option trading program and real estate development company. According to the complaint, “Anderson promised his investors a guaranteed rate of return without risk while in fact he used most of their funds to repay other investors or for his own personal expenses.” The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) barred Anderson from acting as a broker or investment adviser or otherwise associating with firms that sell securities or provide investment advice to the public.
In July 2014, Alabama Securities Commission sanctioned Anderson to cease and desist after allegations that in June 2012 he solicited a client of Pruco Securities, LLC “to invest in his ‘Hedge fund/box trading program’ which he stated performed better when the market was performing poorly. Anderson guaranteed a rate of return of 1.5% over a period of 9 months. The securities were neither registered nor exempt from registration in the state of Alabama.”
In October 2014, FINRA barred Anderson after he failed to respond to request for information.
Resolution.
Anderson has been the subject of 21 customer complaints between 2009 and 2016, three of which were denied and two were closed without action, according to his CRD report:
- December 2016. “Claimants alleged the former advisor sold unregistered securities via a Ponzi scheme.” The case is currently pending.
- February 2016. “Claimant alleges that, prior to his association with the firm, the representative , who is no longer associated with the firm, misrepresented the terms of a life insurance policy sold to claimant in 2011.” The case was settled for $53,000.
- December 2015. “Claimants allege that the former representative engaged in the sale of unregistered securities and a selling away and Ponzi scheme, and that after he was terminated by the firm, they invested funds with him as part of this scheme and, on information and belief, were subject to defalcation and fraud.” The client sought $50,000 in damages and the case was settled for $27,000.
- December 2014. “Claimants alleged that the former representative engaged in a Ponzi scheme and the sale of unregistered securities in violation of securities laws and that, subsequent to the firm’s termination of his association with the firm, they invested funds with him and are informed and believe they were subject to defalcation and fraud.” The case was settled for $500,000.
- November 2014. “Claimants allege that former representative engaged in unsuitable annuity and life insurance sales and in the selling away of investment products not registered as securities, and that they are informed and believe their money was subject to defalcation and fraud.” The case was settled for $975,000.
- November 2014. “Claimants allege that, prior to the former representative’s association with the firm, they made unsuitable investments in real estate with him and were sold unsuitable insurance products, and that, at unspecified times, the former representative engaged in the sale of unregistered securities in violation of securities laws, and that they are informed and believe they were subject to defalcation and fraud.” The case was settled for $750,000.
- October 2014. “Claimants allege that while the advisor was employed by the firm he operated a Ponzi scheme and engaged in the practice of selling investment contracts which were not registered securities and they were sold unsuitable life insurance products. The case was settled for $750,000.
- July 2014. “The client alleges that the representative did not repay monies due under promissory notes issued in November 2012 and May 2013 in connection with box trading of indexes.” The customer is seeking $969,000 in damages and the case is currently pending.
- June 2014. “Claimants allege that former representative engaged in the sale of unregistered securities in violation of securities rules commencing in or about February 2010, and claimants allege they are informed and believe they were subject to defalcation and fraud. The firm is informed that the former registered representative intends to deny allegations of wrongdoing.” The case was settled for $450,000.
- May 2014. “Claimants alleged violation of securities rules with respect to the former representative’s involvement with the sale of unregistered securities commencing on or about February 2010.” The case was settled for $450,000.
- February 2014. “Customer alleges that the rep failed to disclose charges, expense and fees and also did not fully disclose all the facts regarding guarantees and risks.” The customer sought $56,000 in damages and the case was settled for $79,255.01.
- January 2014. “Customer alleged the representative’s recommendation to purchase a variable life insurance policy, in February 2010, was not appropriate. Customer has alleged damages for the return of all premiums paid as noted below.” The customer sought $117,000 in damages and the case was settled for $975,000.
- January 2014. “Customer alleged he was misled by the representative to purchase a variable life insurance policy, in September 2011, that is not suitable. Customer has alleged damages for the return of all premiums paid as noted below.” The customer sought $127,500 in damages and the case was settled for $53,000.
- March 2013. “Customer provided oral allegations the representative misrepresented the variable life insurance policy purchased in May 2009. No specific compensatory damages were alleged.” The case was settled for $466,826.92.
- November 2012. “Regarding the 2012 purchase of a Pru Prem Retire X annuity, the client alleges that the representative did not fully disclose all the facts regarding charges , expenses and fee.” The customer sought $37,000 in damages and the case was settled for $37,882.58.
- June 2012. “Plaintiff alleged that the terms of a variable annuity contract issued in November 2002 were misrepresented by the representative.” The case was settled for $60,000.
- July 2009. “1)fraudulent misrepresentation and suppression 2) violations of sec 8-6-19(a) and sec 8-6-19(c) of the Alabama securities act 3) negligent or wanton training 4) negligent or wanton supervision 5) breach of fiduciary duty 6) breach of contract.” The case was settled for $14,999.
Pursuant to FINRA Rules, member firms are responsible for supervising a broker’s activities during the time the broker is registered with the firm. Therefore, Metlife Securities Inc. may be liable for investment or other losses suffered by Anderson’s customers.
Erez Law represents investors in the United States for claims against former Metlife Securities Inc. financial advisor Bryan Anderson, who is currently serving seven years in federal prison for running a Ponzi scheme. If you were a client of Metlife Securities Inc. or another firm, and have experienced investment losses, please call us at 888-840-1571 or complete our contact form for a free consultation. Erez Law is a nationally recognized law firm representing individuals, trusts, corporations and institutions in claims against brokerage firms, banks and insurance companies on a contingency fee basis.
"*" indicates required fields
