Dennis Mark Adam Merritt Audit (2023) – A Scam or Legit Broker?

Dennis Mark Adam Merritt  – 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 Dennis Mark Adam Merritt.

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

About Dennis Merritt

Dennis Mark Adam Merritt is an Investment Adviser. Dennis Mark Adam Merritt’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 1748115 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/1748115.

Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Dennis Mark Adam Merritt.

Dennis Mark Adam Merritt 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 Dennis Mark Adam Merritt’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.

DISCLOSURE 1 – 

• Event Date: 6/24/2016
• Disclosure Type: Employment Separation After Allegations
• Disclosure Resolution:
• Disclosure Detail :: Firm Name: J.W. Cole Financial
• Termination Type: Discharged
• Allegations: Merritt was named respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he participated in private securities transactions in which his customers invested a total of $115,000 in a speculative investment. The complaint alleges that Merritt did not provide written notice to his member firm prior to participating in these private securities transactions. The complaint also alleges that Merritt recommended that his customers invest in the speculative investment without having conducted adequate due diligence on it and without a reasonable basis to believe that an investment in it was suitable for any customer. The complaint further alleges that Merritt falsely represented in annual certification to his firm that he was complying with its policy prohibiting representatives from participating in private securities transactions. The firm is uncomfortable supervising the representative based upon the recent findings in the FINRA enforcement action.
• Broker Comment: THE SITUATION; A FRIEND OF MINE (WHO WORKED WITH THE COMPANY NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT) INTRODUCED ME TO HIS CEO. THE CEO MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE RAISING CAPITAL AND THAT IF I KNEW ANYONE WANTING TO INVEST INTO A VENTURE CAPITAL OPPORTUNITY, GIVE THEM HIS NAME AND NUMBER. OUT OF MY HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS WITH OVER $55,000,000 UNDER MANAGEMENT, I HAD FOUR CLIENTS WHO WERE WRAPPED UP IN THE TECHNOLOGY HYPE OF APPLE, THE IPO OF FACE BOOK AND WERE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE NEXT BIG OPPORTUNITY. I MADE A MISTAKE AND REFERRED THESE CLIENTS TO THE CEO, WITH WHOM THEY INVESTED. I DID NOT RECEIVE, NOR DID I EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE REFERRALS. ONE OF MY CLIENTS CPA’S COMPLAINED WHEN HE RECEIVED A K-1 FOR OUR MUTUAL CLIENT. I IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED PROCEDURE BY CONTACTING WELLS FARGO COMPLIANCE AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT IS STATED IN THE ABOVE TWO PARAGRAPHS. MY MISTAKE WAS MAKING THE REFERRALS. SINCE BECOMING SERIES 7 LICENSED IN 1987 AND ADDING THE SERIES 24 PRINCIPAL LICENSE IN 1995, I HAVE NEVER CONFRONTED A CONTINUING EDUCATION SITUATION AS A PRODUCER OR PRINCIPAL WHERE A REFERRAL WITHOUT COMPENSATION WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS BEING AGAINST THE RULES. THE OUTCOME; I DID NOT ADMIT OR DENY THE FINRA ALLEGATIONS. HOWEVER, AFTER EXHAUSTING ALL RESOURCES ON ATTORNEY FEES I CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING; UNDER SANCTIONS ON PAGE 13 OF THE FINRA ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER STATEMENT IT IS ORDERED THAT RESPONDENT BE SUSPENDED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS. SANCTIONS ENDED NOVEMBER, 5 2016. THIS EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT ME A TREMENDOUS LESSON. I HAVE COMPLETED THE FOUR-MONTH SUSPENSION AND I WILL NEVER LET ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.

DISCLOSURE 2 – 

• Event Date: 6/24/2016
• Disclosure Type: Employment Separation After Allegations
• Disclosure Resolution:
• Disclosure Detail :: Firm Name: J.W. Cole Advisors, Inc.
• Termination Type: Discharged
• Allegations: The firm is uncomfortable supervising the representative based upon the recent findings in the FINRA enforcement action.
• Broker Comment: THE SITUATION; A FRIEND OF MINE (WHO WORKED WITH THE COMPANY NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT) INTRODUCED ME TO HIS CEO. THE CEO MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE RAISING CAPITAL AND THAT IF I KNEW ANYONE WANTING TO INVEST INTO A VENTURE CAPITAL OPPORTUNITY, GIVE THEM HIS NAME AND NUMBER. OUT OF MY HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS WITH OVER $55,000,000 UNDER MANAGEMENT, I HAD FOUR CLIENTS WHO WERE WRAPPED UP IN THE TECHNOLOGY HYPE OF APPLE, THE IPO OF FACE BOOK AND WERE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE NEXT BIG OPPORTUNITY. I MADE A MISTAKE AND REFERRED THESE CLIENTS TO THE CEO, WITH WHOM THEY INVESTED. I DID NOT RECEIVE, NOR DID I EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE REFERRALS. ONE OF MY CLIENTS CPA’S COMPLAINED WHEN HE RECEIVED A K-1 FOR OUR MUTUAL CLIENT. I IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED PROCEDURE BY CONTACTING WELLS FARGO COMPLIANCE AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT IS STATED IN THE ABOVE TWO PARAGRAPHS. MY MISTAKE WAS MAKING THE REFERRALS. SINCE BECOMING SERIES 7 LICENSED IN 1987 AND ADDING THE SERIES 24 PRINCIPAL LICENSE IN 1995, I HAVE NEVER CONFRONTED A CONTINUING EDUCATION SITUATION AS A PRODUCER OR PRINCIPAL WHERE A REFERRAL WITHOUT COMPENSATION WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS BEING AGAINST THE RULES. THE OUTCOME; I DID NOT ADMIT OR DENY THE FINRA ALLEGATIONS. HOWEVER, AFTER EXHAUSTING ALL RESOURCES ON ATTORNEY FEES I CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING; UNDER SANCTIONS ON PAGE 13 OF THE FINRA ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER STATEMENT IT IS ORDERED THAT RESPONDENT BE SUSPENDED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS. SANCTIONS ENDED NOVEMBER, 5 2016. THIS EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT ME A TREMENDOUS LESSON. I HAVE COMPLETED THE FOUR-MONTH SUSPENSION AND I WILL NEVER LET ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.

DISCLOSURE 3 – 

• Event Date: 3/29/2016
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 2013036962201
• DocketNumberAAO: 2013036962201
• Initiated By: FINRA
• Allegations: Merrit was named a respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he participated in private securities transactions in which his customers invested a total of $115,000 in a speculative investment. The complaint alleges that Merritt did not provide written notice to his member firm prior to participating in these private securities transactions. The complaint also alleges that Merritt recommended that his customers invest in the speculative investment without having conducted adequate due diligence on it and without a reasonable basis to believe that an investment in it was suitable for any customer. The complaint further alleges that Merritt falsely represented in an annual certification to his firm that he was complying with its policy prohibiting representatives from participating in private securities transactions.
• Resolution: Decision & Order of Offer of Settlement
• Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Suspension
• Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: Any capacity
• Duration: four months
• Start Date: 7/5/2016
• End Date: 11/4/2016
• Regulator Statement: Without admitting or denying the allegations, Merritt consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that he participated in private securities transactions without providing prior written notice to his member firm about any of the transactions, and he was also prohibited by the firm from participating in such transactions as a registered representative. The findings stated that Merritt completed an Associate Annual Attestations required by the firm in which he falsely affirmed that he was complying with the firm’s private securities transactions policy. The findings also stated at the time he recommended that customers purchase Class A Units of a publicly traded company, Merritt had not conducted an adequate investigation upon which to make a determination that the company was a suitable investment for any investor, and he did not have a reasonable basis to recommend the company to any customer. Merritt never reviewed the company’s financial projections covering an unspecified 24-month period, did not conduct any research on its product, and did not obtain information on its executives; did not adequately review the company’s Investment Summary in order to determine what a customer would own after purchasing a Class A Unit as defined by the Articles of Incorporation; and never requested, obtained, or reviewed other documents referenced in the Investment Summary that related to a business plan, product development specifications, technology and industry research, and marketing and sales strategies, all of which could be made available on request. In light of Merritt’s financial status, no monetary sanction has been imposed.
• Broker Comment: THE SITUATION; A FRIEND OF MINE (WHO WORKED WITH THE COMPANY NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT) INTRODUCED ME TO HIS CEO. THE CEO MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE RAISING CAPITAL AND THAT IF I KNEW ANYONE WANTING TO INVEST INTO A VENTURE CAPITAL OPPORTUNITY, GIVE THEM HIS NAME AND NUMBER. OUT OF MY HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS WITH OVER $55,000,000 UNDER MANAGEMENT, I HAD FOUR CLIENTS WHO WERE WRAPPED UP IN THE TECHNOLOGY HYPE OF APPLE, THE IPO OF FACE BOOK AND WERE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE NEXT BIG OPPORTUNITY. I MADE A MISTAKE AND REFERRED THESE CLIENTS TO THE CEO, WITH WHOM THEY INVESTED. I DID NOT RECEIVE, NOR DID I EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE REFERRALS. ONE OF MY CLIENTS CPA’S COMPLAINED WHEN HE RECEIVED A K-1 FOR OUR MUTUAL CLIENT. I IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED PROCEDURE BY CONTACTING WELLS FARGO COMPLIANCE AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT IS STATED IN THE ABOVE TWO PARAGRAPHS. MY MISTAKE WAS MAKING THE REFERRALS. SINCE BECOMING SERIES 7 LICENSED IN 1987 AND ADDING THE SERIES 24 PRINCIPAL LICENSE IN 1995, I HAVE NEVER CONFRONTED A CONTINUING EDUCATION SITUATION AS A PRODUCER OR PRINCIPAL WHERE A REFERRAL WITHOUT COMPENSATION WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS BEING AGAINST THE RULES. THE OUTCOME; I DID NOT ADMIT OR DENY THE FINRA ALLEGATIONS. HOWEVER, AFTER EXHAUSTING ALL RESOURCES ON ATTORNEY FEES I CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING; UNDER SANCTIONS ON PAGE 13 OF THE FINRA ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER STATEMENT IT IS ORDERED THAT RESPONDENT BE SUSPENDED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS. SANCTIONS ENDED NOVEMBER, 5 2016. THIS EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT ME A TREMENDOUS LESSON. I HAVE COMPLETED THE FOUR-MONTH SUSPENSION AND I WILL NEVER LET ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.

DISCLOSURE 4 – 

• Event Date: 5/6/2013
• Disclosure Type: Employment Separation After Allegations
• Disclosure Resolution:
• Disclosure Detail :: Firm Name: WELLS FARGO ADVISORS, LLC.
• Termination Type: Discharged
• Allegations: ADMITTED TO REFERRING CLIENTS TO AN INVESTMENT NOT OFFERED THROUGH WELLS FARGO ADVISORS, LLC.
• Broker Comment: THE SITUATION; A FRIEND OF MINE (WHO WORKED WITH THE COMPANY NAMED IN THE COMPLAINT) INTRODUCED ME TO HIS CEO. THE CEO MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE RAISING CAPITAL AND THAT IF I KNEW ANYONE WANTING TO INVEST INTO A VENTURE CAPITAL OPPORTUNITY, GIVE THEM HIS NAME AND NUMBER. OUT OF MY HUNDREDS OF CLIENTS WITH OVER $55,000,000 UNDER MANAGEMENT, I HAD FOUR CLIENTS WHO WERE WRAPPED UP IN THE TECHNOLOGY HYPE OF APPLE, THE IPO OF FACE BOOK AND WERE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE NEXT BIG OPPORTUNITY. I MADE A MISTAKE AND REFERRED THESE CLIENTS TO THE CEO, WITH WHOM THEY INVESTED. I DID NOT RECEIVE, NOR DID I EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR THE REFERRALS. ONE OF MY CLIENTS CPA’S COMPLAINED WHEN HE RECEIVED A K-1 FOR OUR MUTUAL CLIENT. I IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED PROCEDURE BY CONTACTING WELLS FARGO COMPLIANCE AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT IS STATED IN THE ABOVE TWO PARAGRAPHS. MY MISTAKE WAS MAKING THE REFERRALS. SINCE BECOMING SERIES 7 LICENSED IN 1987 AND ADDING THE SERIES 24 PRINCIPAL LICENSE IN 1995, I HAVE NEVER CONFRONTED A CONTINUING EDUCATION SITUATION AS A PRODUCER OR PRINCIPAL WHERE A REFERRAL WITHOUT COMPENSATION WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS BEING AGAINST THE RULES. THE OUTCOME; I DID NOT ADMIT OR DENY THE FINRA ALLEGATIONS. HOWEVER, AFTER EXHAUSTING ALL RESOURCES ON ATTORNEY FEES I CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING; UNDER SANCTIONS ON PAGE 13 OF THE FINRA ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER STATEMENT IT IS ORDERED THAT RESPONDENT BE SUSPENDED FROM ASSOCIATION WITH ANY FINRA MEMBER IN ANY CAPACITY FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS. SANCTIONS ENDED NOVEMBER, 5 2016. THIS EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT ME A TREMENDOUS LESSON. I HAVE COMPLETED THE FOUR-MONTH SUSPENSION AND I WILL NEVER LET ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.

DISCLOSURE 5 – 

• Event Date: 8/31/1998
• Disclosure Type: Regulatory
• Disclosure Resolution: Final
• Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
• Initiated By: SC Securities Division
• Allegations: ORDER OF DENIAL ISSUED 5/28/98 IS VACATED BY A CONSENT AGREEMENT.
• Resolution: Stipulation and Consent
• Sanction Details ::
• Sanction Details: CONSENT ORDER AGREEMENT TO WITHDRAW HIS APPLICATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AND NOT REAPPLY FOR REGISTRATION IN SC FOR A 3 YEAR PERIOD.
• Broker Comment: I APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION AS AN AGENT IN THE STATE OF S.C. THE SECURITES DIVSION NEEDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITHIN 30 DAYS OR I COULD WITHDRAW MY APPLICATION, WITH WRITTEN NOTIFICATION TO THE STATE. MY APPLICATION WAS WITHDRAWN THROUGH THE NASD, BUT MY FIRM FAILED TO NOTIFY S.C. IN WRITING, IN A TIMELY MANNER, THERFORE AN ORDER OF DENIAL WAS ISSUED. THE CONSENT ORDER WILL NOT PREJUDICE ME IN OTHER STATES AND THE EARLIER DENIAL WILL NO LONGER CONSTITUTE A BAR TO REGISTRATION IN S.C. AS LONG AS I HONOR MY COMMITMENTS.

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.

• J.W. COLE FINANCIAL, INC. (CRD#: 124583) :: 3/11/2014 – 6/24/2016 :: CLEARWATER, FL
• CETERA INVESTMENT SERVICES LLC (CRD#: 15340) :: 8/1/2013 – 10/29/2013 :: CLEARWATER, FL
• WELLS FARGO ADVISORS, LLC (CRD#: 19616) :: 6/12/2009 – 5/13/2013 :: PALM HARBOR, FL
• MORGAN KEEGAN & COMPANY, INC. (CRD#: 4161) :: 2/13/2007 – 6/12/2009 :: CLEARWATER, FL
• AMSOUTH INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 15692) :: 9/26/1994 – 2/13/2007 :: CLEARWATER, FL
• NATIONSSECURITIES (CRD#: 32542) :: 6/14/1993 – 9/13/1994
• KEMPER FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. (CRD#: 798) :: 9/29/1992 – 6/18/1993
• CITICORP INVESTMENT SERVICES (CRD#: 23988) :: 8/10/1990 – 8/25/1992 :: LONG ISLAND CITY, NY
• CITICORP FINANCIAL SERVICES,INC. (CRD#: 14675) :: 12/24/1990 – 6/1/1992
• EMPIRE NATIONAL SECURITIES, INCORPORATED (CRD#: 7361) :: 9/1/1988 – 8/10/1990
• SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON INC. (CRD#: 7506) :: 5/14/1988 – 9/2/1988
• E. F. HUTTON & COMPANY INC (CRD#: 235) :: 10/21/1987 – 5/14/1988

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 Dennis Mark Adam Merritt, 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 Dennis Merritt

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

Dennis Mark Adam Merritt – 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 (1748115) for the broker – Dennis Mark Adam Merritt
• 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 ‘ComplaintsBoard,’ 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/dennis-mark-adam-merritt/.