Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC, along with Huntington Financial Advisors and The Huntington Investment Company, are nationally recognized financial institutions trusted by thousands of investors. However, questions have recently arisen surrounding one of their financial professionals: Jeremy Ethan Hershey (CRD #5881725). As reported in his public FINRA BrokerCheck profile, a pattern of investor complaints has surfaced, specifically focusing on allegations of misrepresentation and unsuitable investment recommendations. Investors should take note, as these allegations highlight the importance of careful due diligence when choosing a financial advisor.
Overview: Jeremy Hershey‘s Background and Credentials
Jeremy Ethan Hershey is a registered broker with substantial credentials in the financial industry. His licensing, as reflected on his BrokerCheck report, includes:
- Securities Industry Essentials (SIE)
- Series 7
- Series 6
- Series 65
- Series 63
He is currently affiliated with Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC, Huntington Financial Advisors, and The Huntington Investment Company. His prior appointments include positions at AXA Advisors, LLC, State Farm VP Management Corp., and ProEquities, Inc. While working with multiple firms across a career is not inherently problematic, it’s a detail investors sometimes consider as part of an overall pattern when evaluating a broker’s record.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Name | Jeremy Ethan Hershey |
| CRD # | 5881725 |
| Current Firms | Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC, Huntington Financial Advisors, The Huntington Investment Company |
| Exams Passed | SIE, Series 7, Series 6, Series 65, Series 63 |
| Previous Firms | AXA Advisors, LLC, State Farm VP Management Corp., ProEquities, Inc. |
| Customer Disputes | Three. Recent: misrepresentation (settled $14,426); mutual fund (denied). |
Customer Complaints: A Closer Look at the Allegations
A key feature of Jeremy Hershey’s professional history is the presence of three customer dispute disclosures found on his FINRA BrokerCheck profile. Two of these disputes are especially noteworthy:
- Dispute 1 (May 19, 2026): The most recent complaint involved the alleged misrepresentation of a market-linked certificate of deposit, purchased for a significant sum of $300,000 in April 2026. The customer originally sought $5,000 in damages, but the matter was ultimately settled for $14,426, nearly three times the amount requested. Notably, the record indicates there was no individual contribution from Hershey himself.
- Dispute 2 (April 22, 2022): Another customer filed a complaint alleging a poor mutual fund recommendation and later, misrepresentation. The damages sought totaled $31,136.81. Jeremy Hershey’s firm denied the complaint on June 28, 2022. It’s important for investors to understand that a denial is a decision made by the firm—not a definitive determination of innocence or guilt.
- Dispute 3: An additional customer dispute is referenced in the BrokerCheck record but without full public details. The mere presence of multiple disputes may warrant closer examination for any investor or potential client.
Customer Disputes Summary Table
| Dispute | Allegation | Amount Sought | Settlement / Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Misrepresentation of market-linked CD | $5,000 (on $300,000 investment) | Settled for $14,426 |
| 2 | Poor mutual fund recommendation, misrepresentation | $31,136.81 | Denied by firm |
| 3 | Not publicly detailed | Unknown | Disclosed on BrokerCheck |
What Do These Allegations Mean for Investors?
While a single customer dispute does not always indicate a systemic issue, multiple complaints involving similar allegations—such as unsuitable investment recommendations or misrepresentation—should trigger careful consideration. Advisors are trusted to provide accurate, clear, and balanced advice. Allegations of misrepresenting products or failing to properly explain investment risks call into question whether that trust has been upheld.
According to Investopedia, investment fraud and unsuitable investment advice damage not only investors’ portfolios, but also their confidence in the markets. Regulatory agencies like FINRA and the SEC are tasked with enforcing standards of care, including the newer Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI), effective since June 30, 2020. Under Reg BI, advisors must act in their clients’ best interests—not simply recommend suitable products. This higher standard underscores just how significant misrepresentation allegations are.
Investor Protections and FINRA Rules Explained
The landscape of investment advice is shaped by several important rules designed to protect investors:
- FINRA Rule 2210: Requires that all broker communications with the public be fair, balanced, and not misleading. For example, an advisor must present risks as well as potential rewards and may not omit key information.
- FINRA Rule 3110: Imposes a supervisory obligation on the advisory firm, ensuring systems are in place to monitor advisor conduct and address customer complaints.
- Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI): Sets out four key obligations:
- Disclosure Obligation: Full transparency on fees, conflicts of interest, and the nature of the broker-client relationship.
- Care Obligation: Diligence in evaluating costs, risks, and alternatives for all recommendations.
- Conflict of Interest Obligation: Identifying and mitigating conflicts that might affect objectivity.
- Compliance Obligation: Maintaining robust supervisory policies to ensure regulatory compliance.
If a recommendation—such as a $300,000 market-linked CD—was made on incomplete or misleading information, this could represent a violation of both industry rules and the trust clients place in their advisors.
Understanding Settlements, Denials, and Disclosure Patterns
It’s worthwhile to understand why firms settle customer disputes or deny them. A settlement generally suggests the firm recognized some element of risk or potential for liability, even if the advisor involved did not contribute financially. Conversely, a denial represents only the firm’s internal position, not a definitive judgment. When repeated allegations of misrepresentation or unsuitable advice emerge, patterns themselves can be highly significant.
National studies estimate that about 7% of financial advisors have a history of misconduct, and those
Correction or Updated Info Needed? The information in this article includes the publisher's opinion and is based on publicly available materials believed to be accurate at the time of publication.
We welcome updates. If you have personal knowledge of additional facts or details related to any issues or individuals, and you believe that information would enhance the accuracy of the article, don't hesitate to get in touch with us https://financialadvisorcomplaints.com/article-correction-update/ and provide you name, address, email, and telephone contact for follow-up reporting, along with the back-up for any updates. The publisher strives to provide the most up-to-date and most accurate report regarding all issues and events, and welcomes input from any individuals with personal knowledge.
DISCLAIMER: The information herein is derived from public sources and is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Legal matters may have subsequent developments, and market values may fluctuate. While we strive for accuracy, we make no representations about the completeness or reliability of this information. Readers should independently verify all content and seek professional advice as needed.
