Brian Everett of Cetera Advisors Faces Investor Dispute Over Alleged Unsuitable Investments

An Analysis of the Brian Everett Case

As a financial analyst with expertise in legal matters, I find the recent allegations against Brian Everett, a broker registered with Cetera Advisors, concerning. Unfolding with alarming revelations, the situation has raised eyebrows on a national level, calling into question the degree of trust we place in financial advisors.

Two notable investor disputes against Everett involve his alleged encouragement of unsuitable and over-concentrated alternative investments. The impact of this decision on the investors has been significant, with an ongoing claim for $100,000 and a recent dissolution for a whopping $63,000. These figures give investors chills, particularly those who prefer safer investment portfolios.

Who is Brian Everett?

When evaluating the background of Brian Everett (CRD #: 1250585), it isn’t surprising to see his extensive credentials. Having passed several examinations, Everett has his hands full with various certificates. He is registered as a broker in 22 states and holds the position of an investment adviser in Texas.

“You must trust and believe in people, or life becomes impossible.” – Anton Chekhov. Everett’s passage of a wide range of examinations, including the Series 65 Uniform Investment Adviser Law Examination and the Series 63 Uniform Securities Agent State Law Examination, implies deep knowledge of the industry and a commitment to adhere to its rules and regulations.

Throughout his 39-year-old career, Everett has been associated with several reputable firms like First Allied Securities and LPL Financial. Despite these impressive credentials, the fact that investors are alleging misuse of their trust makes us question the ethical standards in the financial advisory field.

Breaking Down FINRA Rule 2111

The allegations levied against Everett hinge on a violation of FINRA Rule 2111, which dictates that investments should align with an investor’s profile. Essentially, making suitable recommendations requires an understanding and consideration of various factors, such as the investor’s age, risk tolerance, tax status, investment experience, and financial goals.

The rule further highlights the importance of maintaining a diversified investment portfolio. Placing a significant portion of a portfolio in a single sector is not just irresponsible; it exposes the investor to a higher level of risk.

The Fallout and Lessons Learned

What are the repercussions of such alleged breaches of trust? The consequences are far-reaching. For the investor, there can be devastating financial losses; for the financial advisor, the damage can be irreparable, with drastic harm to their reputation and loss of credibility.

It’s vital as an investor to comprehend investor rights and safeguards in place. According to a survey by the North American Securities Administrators Association, 50% of overall enforcement actions are geared toward protecting senior citizens who are typically more vulnerable to broker misconduct.

Drawing lessons from the Brian Everett case, the crux of the matter remains that trust and transparency between an investor and a financial advisor must be the bedrock of their relationship. This relationship should not be manipulated for personal gain or to recommend investments that are far from the investor’s risk capacity and financial goals.

As an industry professional, I emphasize on potential investors to carry out due diligence: research financial advisors, examine their past records and licenses, and fact-check with multiple sources. Remember, your investment decisions shape your financial future, so taking the time to verify your advisor’s credibility is imperative.

Scroll to Top