Bryant Caveness Allegedly Performs Discretionary Trades in Customer Accounts.

Bryant Caveness Allegedly Performs Discretionary Trades...
Bryant Caveness Allegedly Performs Discretionary Trades...

Oakes & Fosher, a law firm, is currently conducting an investigation into the allegations of improper conduct made against securities broker Bryant Caveness. Throughout the course of his career, Bryant Caveness was involved in multiple customer disputes, as indicated by the information that is available to the public on his FINRA BrokerCheck report.

Bryant Caveness was a securities broker who worked in the industry for a total of twenty years. He was based in the state of Tennessee. Throughout the course of his career, he has held registrations with three separate companies.

Signings and Registrations by Bryant Caveness

Morgan Stanley DW (1999-2003)
Services Provided by Ameriprise Advisors (2003-2009)
Financial services provided by Ameriprise (2009-2020)
The Charges or Accusations

In April of 2001, a client claimed that Bryant Caveness had advised them to make investments that were inappropriate for them. Damages totaling $37,500 were agreed upon in the settlement of this case.
In July of 2010, a client claimed that Caveness Investment Management had carried out inappropriate discretionary trades in his portfolio.

The damages in this case totaled $85,000 when it was finally settled. Caveness was let go from his position at Ameriprise Financial in June 2020 due to violations of company policy concerning personal trade, ethics, and the solicitation of exchange-traded products.
What exactly does this entail?

Securities brokers have a duty to their customers to always act in their best financial interests. This is one of their responsibilities as a fiduciary. This means that brokers can only recommend investments to their clients that are appropriate for them based on their individual circumstances.

By considering the many different factors that the customer has provided to the broker, such as those provided by Bryant Caveness, brokers are able to determine whether or not a specific investment is appropriate for their client. This includes the customer’s investment goals, current financial situation, requirements for liquidity, and level of comfort with taking risks.

If a broker invests their client’s money in a way that is counter to these needs, they have either acted fraudulently by putting their own financial interests ahead of their client’s or negligently by placing their own interests ahead of their client’s.

Unsuitable management of a customer’s account disqualifies a broker from the ability to carry out their duties in the manner that is required of them, regardless of whether the broker’s intention was to commit fraud or simply to be negligent.

Oakes & Fosher is Able to Assist You

After suffering financial losses as a result of securities broker fraud and/or negligence, many investors are unaware of the legal options they have available to seek compensation for those losses. The fact of the matter is that those investors who have suffered financial losses as a result of this fraud or negligence may in fact be eligible to receive compensation for their losses.

The entire scope of Oakes & Fosher’s legal practise is devoted to assisting investors located all over the United States. Please get in touch with Oakes & Fosher for a no-cost and confidential consultation if you or someone you know has suffered financial losses as a result of investing with Bryant Caveness.

Cases are taken on by Oakes & Fosher on a contingency basis, which means there are no fees charged unless we are successful in obtaining compensation for our clients.

Disclosures Regarding Customer Disputes Have Been Made Regarding Bryant Caveness

According to a dispute that was lodged with FINRA in November 2020, a former broker by the name of Bryant Caveness advised his clients to put their money into gold coins, inverse and leveraged ETFs, precious metals and mining stocks while he was employed by Ameriprise Financial Services.

Bryant Caveness- FINRA Securities
Arbitration by FINRA Securities

Additionally, he suggested that they purchase gold. In addition, the customers claimed that the product was unsuitable, that the seller breached their fiduciary duty, and that the seller was negligent, and they demanded $230,000 in purported damages.

Following a further review of public information as reported on his FINRA broker check reports, securities attorney Alan Rosca discovered that Caveness has additional customer dispute disclosures initiated, the majority of which concern the allegation that the firm made unsuitable investment recommendations.

During a dispute with the client that began in July 2010, the customer verbally asserted that the client’s portfolio had been subject to discretionary trading of investments that were inappropriate. As a consequence of this, the customer demanded that they be compensated a total of $170,000 in damages; however, the disagreement was finally resolved for only half of the amount that was requested, which was $85,000.

The second customer dispute was opened based on allegations that were very similar to the first. The disagreement, which began in May of 2001 and was initiated on the basis of a verbal complaint and allegation of unsuitable investment recommendation, was brought about.

The client’s initial claim for damages stemming from the dispute was for $100,000; however, they were ultimately only able to recover $37,500 in damages as a result of the dispute.

During the period beginning in October 1999 and ending in January 2003, Bryant Caveness worked for Morgan Stanley DW INC.

In conclusion, it is essential to make the point that, as of the publication date of this article, there has not been a determination of liability in relation to the complaints or allegations that are discussed in this article, unless the contrary is specifically stated elsewhere in the text. Any reader should also read the original sources that are linked to in this blog to ensure that the information is accurate.

This includes any BrokerCheck report and/or record of any disciplinary or regulatory action. These sources have been incorporated into the text of this blog by way of references, and they will serve as authoritative materials in the event that this blog contains any errors or inconsistencies.


1. Business – NFO News

2. Crime – NFO News

3. Exclusive – NFO News

4. Finance – NFO News

5. Legal – NFO News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.