CFP Board Imposes Public Sanctions On 51 Individuals

Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) announced today public sanctions against 51 current or former CFP® professionals or candidates for CFP® certification, effective immediately or on the date noted in each case. Public sanctions taken by CFP Board, in order of increasing severity, include Public Censures, Suspensions, Temporary Bars, Permanent Bars and Revocations of the right to use the CFP® marks.

More than three-fourths of the public sanctions announced in this news release are the result of "Historical Investigations" opened by CFP Board following background checks conducted on all CFP® professionals to detect potential misconduct that previously had not been reported to CFP Board. This misconduct can include regulatory actions, firm terminations, customer complaints, arbitrations, and civil court litigation that involve professional conduct, criminal matters, bankruptcies, civil judgments, and tax liens.

CFP Board’s Enforcement Process

As part of their certification, CFP® professionals make a commitment to CFP Board to abide by CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards), or its predecessor, the Standards of Professional Conduct (Standards), which included the Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Rules of Conduct and Financial Planning Practice Standards. CFP Board’s Procedural Rules set forth the process for investigating matters and imposing sanctions where violations have been found.

CFP Board enforces its ethical standards by investigating alleged violations and, where there is probable cause to believe there are grounds for sanction, presents a Complaint containing the alleged violations to CFP Board’s Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Commission meets at least six times a year to review any matter in which CFP Board has alleged that a CFP® professional has violated the Code and Standards, or its predecessor Standards. The Commission functions in accordance with the Procedural Rules and reviews all matters on a case-by-case basis, considering the details specific to an individual case.

If the Commission determines there are grounds for sanction, then it may impose a sanction. More information on CFP Board’s enforcement process can be found at CFP.net/ethics/enforcement.

The Public Sanctions

A short summary of each sanction can be found below. At CFP.net/verify-a-cfp-professional, CFP Board provides the public with:

• The ability to check on any individual’s CFP Board disciplinary history and CFP® certification status.
• Links to other sources of information about CFP® professionals that may be more recent or that may contain information that has not led to CFP Board discipline and does not appear on CFP Board’s website. This information may include customer disputes, disciplinary actions taken by a regulator or employer, certain criminal matters, and certain financial matters (such as bankruptcy proceedings and unpaid judgments or liens).
• Links to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) BrokerCheck and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Investment Adviser Public Disclosure databases for individuals who are subject to FINRA or SEC oversight.

PUBLIC CENSURE

CALIFORNIA

M. Franklin Parrish, CFP® (Walnut Creek, California): In June 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Parrish received a Public Censure. Pursuant to Section E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards), a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. Such conduct includes a personal bankruptcy or business bankruptcy filing or adjudication where the CFP® professional was a Control Person of the business, unless the CFP® professional can rebut the presumption that the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly the CFP® professional’s or the business’s financial affairs. On November 1, 2019, Mr. Parrish filed for a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, and CFP Board filed a Complaint for Single Bankruptcy on February 5, 2021 pursuant to Article 3.3 of the Procedural Rules. In his Answer to the Complaint, Mr. Parrish admitted to the bankruptcy but denied that the existence of the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly his financial affairs. After a hearing, the Commission concluded that Mr. Parrish did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that he had rebutted the presumption that the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly his financial affairs. The Commission determined that, although Mr. Parrish stated that he had medical issues leading to loss of income, he did not present adequate evidence to meet his burden and, instead, the evidence showed that the bankruptcy was more likely caused by excessive spending. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that Mr. Parrish violated Standard E.2.c. of the Code and Standards, providing grounds for sanction, and issued to him a Public Censure.

FLORIDA

Thomas A. Walsh, CFP® (Sarasota, Florida): In May 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Walsh entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which Mr. Walsh agreed that CFP Board would issue a Public Censure. In the Consent Order, Mr. Walsh consented to findings that, in April 2016, Mr. Walsh accepted transaction instructions from a client via email, sold securities from a client’s account, and later learned that the client’s email had been hacked. This conduct was contrary to his employer’s policies and procedures because he executed sales and effected wire transfers without verbally confirming that he was authorized to do so. Mr. Walsh was terminated by his employer for this conduct, and then the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued Mr. Walsh a Cautionary Action Letter (CAL) finding that his conduct violated FINRA’s rules. Mr. Walsh also failed to disclose his termination and FINRA’s CAL to CFP Board as required. Mr. Walsh consented to findings that this conduct violated the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for sanction, including: Rule 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant who is an employee/agent shall perform professional services with dedication to the lawful objectives of the employer/principal; Rule 6.5, which states that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession; and Rule 6.2, which states that a certificant shall meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Walsh a Public Censure.

GEORGIA

R. Stephen Lane, CFP® (Decatur, Georgia): In July 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Lane entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which the Commission issued Mr. Lane a Public Censure. The Commission imposed this sanction after determining that Mr. Lane failed to timely pay his federal taxes resulting in a debt in excess of $120,000, while also recognizing that he has a plan in place to address that debt and a record of compliance with that plan. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Lane also consented to the Commission’s finding that his conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession, providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Lane a Public Censure.

OHIO

Jason S. John, CFP® (Powell, Ohio): In August 2021, CFP Board issued an Order of Public Censure to Mr. John pursuant to Article 3.4.c. of the Procedural Rules after he admitted that he filed a single personal bankruptcy on April 9, 2019 , confirmed that he had no other bankruptcy matters, and admitted that the bankruptcy matter demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly his or his business’s financial affairs in violation of Article E.2.c. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct. Accordingly, CFP Board issued to Mr. John a Public Censure.

TEXAS

Donald Lee Laseter, CFP® (Dallas, Texas): In May 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Laseter entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which Mr. Laseter received a Public Censure. In the Consent Order, Mr. Laseter consented to CFP Board’s findings that he failed to register as an investment adviser with the State of Texas Securities Board despite providing investment advice to a limited number of clients for over 20 years. This failure resulted in the Texas Securities Board issuing a disciplinary order and $15,000 fine to Mr. Laseter when he registered with Texas in 2016. Mr. Laseter also consented to findings that he made a false statement to CFP Board on his 2018 Ethics Declaration when he failed to disclose his 2016 Texas Securities Board Disciplinary Order to CFP Board. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Laseter’s conduct violated Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services provided to the client, and Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks, providing grounds for a sanction. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Laseter a Public Censure.

WASHINGTON

Ronald C. Peck, II, CFP® (Kirkland, Washington): In August 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Peck entered into a Consent Order in which Mr. Peck agreed that CFP Board would issue a Public Censure. In the Consent Order, Mr. Peck consented to findings that, in October 2018, he entered into a consent order (Order) with the State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions - Securities Division on behalf of himself and his company, of which he is sole owner. The Order found that Mr. Peck violated the State of Washington Securities Act, Chapter RCW 21.20.040(3) between July 2017 and March 2018 by transacting business in the State of Washington as an investment adviser for compensation while not being licensed as an investment adviser in the State of Washington. As part of the Order, Mr. Peck agreed to pay a $10,000 fine prior to completing the registration process. Mr. Peck also consented to CFP Board's findings that he failed to disclose the Order to CFP Board within 30 days as then-required by Article 13.2 of CFP Board’s Disciplinary Rules and Procedures. Mr. Peck also falsely stated to CFP Board that he had not been subject of a regulatory investigation by not disclosing the Order in his 2019 Ethics Declaration. Mr. Peck consented to findings by CFP Board that this conduct violated Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services provided to the client, and Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks, providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Peck a Public Censure.

SUSPENSION

CALIFORNIA

Patrick Walsh (Westlake Village, California): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Walsh’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Walsh’s failure to acknowledge or respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by the Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought information about: (1) a 2016 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration settled for $156,000 and (2) a 2015 Federal Tax Lien for $122,696. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Walsh has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Walsh’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Walsh’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Walsh’s suspension was effective as of June 28, 2021.

FLORIDA

Paul Clough (Sebring, Florida): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Clough’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Clough’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Clough was subject to a 2014 civil judgment filed against him in favor of Magnum Air Dynamics in the amount of $579,620. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Clough has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Clough’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Clough’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Clough’s suspension was effective as of July 19, 2021.

Frank W. Hubbell, III (Lady Lake, Florida): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Hubbell’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Hubbell’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Hubbell was the subject of civil suits, one in 2012 and one in 2017. CFP Board further sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Hubbell misled CFP Board by failing to disclose these civil actions on his biennial Ethics Declaration forms. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Hubbell has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Hubbell’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Hubbell’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Hubbell’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

Winston G. Mollena (Longwood, Florida): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an order suspending Mr. Mollena’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Mollena’s failure to cooperate with CFP Board’s investigation through his lack of response to CFP Board’s investigative correspondence, including a Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Mollena was terminated from his firm for his “failure to respond to home office request regarding disclosure of financial events.” CFP Board further sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Mollena misled CFP Board by failing to disclose his termination on his Ethics Disclosure forms. Mr. Mollena’s conduct could have violated Rules 5.1 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Mollena failed to acknowledge receipt of an NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. Pursuant to Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Mollena has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Mollena’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Mollena’s suspension was effective as of June 10, 2021.

GEORGIA

John E. Anderson (Senoia, Georgia): In July 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Anderson received a one-year-and-one-day suspension of his right to use the CFP® certification marks. The Commission issued its order after determining that, among other things, Mr. Anderson filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2020, which discharged $135,748 of debt, including liens, interest, and penalties owed to the Georgia Department of Revenue in the amount of $17,835.15 for tax year 2015, and federal income tax liabilities owed to the Internal Revenue Service, including liens, interest, and penalties for tax years 2010, 2011, and 2015, in the amount of $71,872. Mr. Anderson also filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2006, which he then converted into a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, but he was not a CFP® professional at the time of that filing. Mr. Anderson also is in arrears on the mortgage of his primary home, but he is negotiating a payment plan to pay that debt. The Commission determined that Mr. Anderson’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession, providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Anderson a suspension for one year and one day. Mr. Anderson’s suspension is effective from August 28, 2021 until August 29, 2022.

Mark J. Stevens (Roswell, Georgia): In July 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Stevens received a one-year-and-one-day suspension of his right to use the CFP® certification marks. The Commission concluded that Mr. Stevens’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. The Commission issued its order after determining that, among other things, Mr. Stevens has four outstanding federal tax liens issued against him between 2009 and 2012 by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that total over $200,000 combined. The Commission also determined that Mr. Stevens has no plan in place to repay the tax liens and is currently listed as “uncollectible” by the IRS. The Commission also found that Mr. Stevens’s actions show a pattern of inability to manage his personal finances in such a way to withhold sufficient taxes, make yearly adjustments to tax withholdings to meet his tax liability, or to pay off the balance of his tax liability. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Stevens a suspension for one year and one day. Mr. Stevens’ suspension is effective from July 1, 2021 until July 2, 2022.

ILLINOIS

Norbert Filian (Hoffman Estates, Illinois): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Filian’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Filian’s failure to acknowledge or respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by the Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought information about a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Arbitration filed October 7, 2019. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Filian has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Filian’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Filian’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Filian’s suspension was effective as of June 28, 2021.

KANSAS

Mark P. Cussen (Overland Park, Kansas): In June 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Cussen entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which the Commission issued to Mr. Cussen a suspension of one year and one day. The Commission imposed this sanction after determining that Mr. Cussen failed to pay federal taxes each year for seven years, resulting in federal tax liens amounting to $126,000.00. Mr. Cussen has no previous disciplinary history with CFP Board and there is no evidence that Mr. Cussen’s conduct involved clients or caused client harm. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Cussen also consented to the Commission’s finding that his conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission suspended Mr. Cussen’s CFP® certification for one year and one day, effective June 21, 2021.

NEW YORK

Anthony Anzalone (New York, New York): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Anzalone’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Anzalone’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a 2018 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Arbitration against Mr. Anzalone that settled for $25,000 on August 14, 2019. CFP Board further sought to investigate whether Mr. Anzalone misled CFP Board by failing to disclose this arbitration on his subsequent Ethics Declaration form. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Anzalone has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Anzalone’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Anzalone’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Anzalone’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

Carl Serafino (New York, New York): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Serafino’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Serafino’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate: (1) a 2016 New York State Tax Warrant for $5,573.77 and (2) a 2019 Federal Tax Lien for $44,640 filed against Mr. Serafino, which could demonstrate Mr. Serafino’s inability to manage responsibly his financial affairs. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Serafino has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Serafino’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Serafino’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Serafino’s suspension was effective as of July 6, 2021.

OHIO

Steven R. French (Cincinnati, Ohio): In August 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. French received a one-year-and-one-day suspension of his right to use the CFP® certification marks. The Commission issued its order after determining that, among other things, Mr. French entered into a Cease-and-Desist Consent Order (Consent Order) with the State of Ohio Department of Commerce, Division of Securities (Division). Mr. French admitted to misreporting to the Division the status of his investment advisory practice by stating that he did not manage assets when he had 14 long-time clients. The Consent Order found that he made a false representation to the Division in an inquiry into the conduct of his business. The Commission concluded that the multiple instances of violations of Ohio law and the attempt to mislead a regulator reflect adversely on both Mr. French’s integrity and fitness as a CFP® professional in violation of Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Furthermore, the Commission determined that Mr. French failed to timely disclose the Consent Order to CFP Board and misrepresented on a CFP Board Ethics Declaration in April 2019 that he had never been the subject of a governmental agency or self-regulatory organization inquiry or investigation, which violated Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. French a suspension for one year and one day. Mr. French’s suspension is effective from August 28, 2021 until August 29, 2022.

Timothy P. Jarvis (Lancaster, Ohio): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Jarvis’ right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Jarvis’ failure to file an acknowledgment and response to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate Ohio State Tax liens filed February 25, 2017 in the amount of $42,002.00 and on January 23, 2021 in the amount of $3,654.00. Mr. Jarvis failed to report the State Tax liens to CFP Board as required by Standard E.3 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code & Standards) and may have violated Standard E.2.d of the Code & Standards, which requires a CFP® professional to refrain from adverse conduct, including conduct resulting in a federal tax lien on property owned by the CFP® professional, unless the CFP® professional can rebut the presumption that the federal tax lien demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly the CFP® professional’s financial affairs. In accordance with Article 4.2. of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Jarvis’ conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension. Ms. Jarvis’ suspension was effective as of July 28, 2021.

Julie Weekley (Columbus, Ohio): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Ms. Weekley’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Ms. Weekley’s failure to file an Answer to a Complaint as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate Federal Tax Liens filed on September 13, 2018 in the amount of $70,658.93 and on August 8, 2019 in the amount of $103,679.00. Ms. Weekley failed to report the Federal Tax Liens to CFP Board as required by Standard E.3 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code & Standards) and may have violated Standard E.2.d of the Code & Standards, which requires a CFP® professional to refrain from adverse conduct, including conduct resulting in a federal tax lien on property owned by the CFP® professional, unless the CFP® professional can rebut the presumption that the federal tax lien demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly the CFP® professional’s financial affairs. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Ms. Weekley’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension. Ms. Weekley’s suspension was effective as of July 28, 2021.

Christopher Wendel (Celina, Ohio): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Wendel’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Wendel’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate facts surrounding five settled customer disputes, one pending customer dispute, an Ohio Division of Securities Regulatory Action, and a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Arbitration. CFP Board further sought to investigate whether Mr. Wendel misled CFP Board by failing to disclose his any of these matters on his biennial Ethics Declaration forms. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Wendel has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Wendel’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Wendel’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Wendel’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

Steven L. Meier (Columbus, Ohio): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Meier’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. Meier’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate whether Mr. Meier is the subject of two tax liens, both filed in 2019. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Meier has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Meier’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Meier’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Meier’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

PENNSYLVANIA

Joseph DeMuro, Jr. (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. DeMuro’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Mr. DeMuro’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. DeMuro was party to a December 9, 2013 Civil Action Court of Common Pleas in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. CFP Board further sought to investigate allegations that Mr. DeMuro misled CFP Board by failing to disclose his civil action on his Ethics Declaration forms. Mr. DeMuro’s conduct may have violated Rules 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct, which requires a certificant to perform professional services with dedication to the lawful objectives of his or her employer/principal, and Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which requires a certificant to meet all CFP Board requirements. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. DeMuro has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. DeMuro’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. DeMuro’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. DeMuro’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

TEXAS

Wade L. Neyland (Marquez, Texas): In June 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Neyland entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which the Commission issued Mr. Neyland a suspension of one year and one day. The Commission imposed this sanction after determining that Mr. Neyland failed to pay his federal taxes resulting in a debt of $91,866.29 over the course of three years. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Neyland also consented to the Commission’s finding that his conduct reflected adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession, in violation of Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission suspended Mr. Neyland’s certification for one year and one day effective June 23, 2021.

WASHINGTON

Jacqueline M. Jacobsen (Clinton, Washington): In May 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Ms. Jacobsen entered into a Consent Order in which Ms. Jacobsen agreed that CFP Board would issue a six-month suspension of her CFP® certification. In the Consent Order, Ms. Jacobsen consented to findings that she entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC) with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) finding that Ms. Jacobsen misused firm funds in December 2016 and January 2017 by using funds from her Alternative Flexible Grid Program Account at the firm in a manner inconsistent with the firm's permitted use of the funds. In the AWC, Ms. Jacobsen consented to a six-month suspension from association with any FINRA member in any capacity and a $5,000 fine. In the AWC, Ms. Jacobsen also consented to a finding that her actions, which resulted in her termination from the firm, violated FINRA Rule 2010. The FINRA suspension was effective from May 4, 2020 to November 3, 2020. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Ms. Jacobsen consented to findings that her conduct violated Rule 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant who is an employee/agent shall perform professional services with dedication to the lawful objectives of the employer/principal, and Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession, providing grounds for sanction. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Ms. Jacobsen a six-month suspension of her CFP® certification effective May 24, 2021.

WISCONSIN

Annie L. McGrath (Madison, Wisconsin): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Ms. McGrath’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This sanction followed Ms. McGrath’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that SSM Health Care of Wisconsin Inc. filed a civil suit against Ms. McGrath, resulting in a 2016 judgment entered against Ms. McGrath. CFP Board further sought to investigate whether Ms. McGrath misled CFP Board by failing to disclose this civil suit on her subsequent Ethics Declaration form. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. McGrath has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Ms. McGrath’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Ms. McGrath’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Ms. McGrath’s suspension was effective as of June 2, 2021.

TEMPORARY BAR

CALIFORNIA

Hayato Tamura (Anaheim, California): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Tamura from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Tamura’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate Mr. Tamura’s (1) 2019 Voluntary Resignation and (2) then-pending 2019 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Arbitration. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Tamura has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Tamura’s conduct, and the fact that Mr. Tamura relinquished his certification prior to the issuance of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Tamura is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Tamura’s temporary bar became effective as of July 8, 2021.

FLORIDA

Kevin Cantwell (Sound Beach, Florida): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Cantwell from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Cantwell’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate an outstanding 2017 Federal Tax Lien filed against Mr. Cantwell. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Cantwell has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Cantwell’s conduct, as well as the fact that Mr. Cantwell had relinquished his right to use the marks prior to entry of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Cantwell is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Cantwell’s temporary bar became effective as of July 6, 2021.

MAINE

James Loeser (Saco, Maine): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Loeser from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Loeser’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate various civil judgments filed against Mr. Loeser, including a 2014 civil judgment for $33,403 in favor of a bank, a 2015 civil judgment for $6,116 in favor of a second bank, and 2017 civil judgments for $10,654 and $14,069 in favor of a limited liability company. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Loeser has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Loeser’s conduct, as well as the fact that Mr. Loeser had relinquished his right to use the marks prior to entry of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Loeser is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Loeser’s temporary bar became effective as of July 12, 2021.

NEW JERSEY

Robert A. High (Montvale, New Jersey): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. High from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. High’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a 2020 customer complaint filed against Mr. High, alleging unauthorized use of the client's e-signature, and Mr. High’s resignation following these allegations. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. High has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. High’s conduct, as well as the fact that Mr. High had relinquished his certification prior to issuance of CFP Board’s Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. High is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. High’s temporary bar became effective as of July 6, 2021.

OHIO

Matthew Maxwell (Avon Lake, Ohio): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Maxwell from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Maxwell’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a 2012 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Arbitration and a 2018 criminal Aggravated Menacing Felonious charge filed against Mr. Maxwell. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Maxwell has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Maxwell’s conduct, and the fact that Mr. Maxwell relinquished his certification prior to the issuance of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Maxwell is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Maxwell’s temporary bar became effective as of July 14, 2021.

OREGON

Adam Brooks (Bend, Oregon): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Brooks from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Brooks’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a 2014 customer complaint filed against Mr. Brooks and settled for $85,000 and a 2013 Chapter 7 Bankruptcy filed by Mr. Brooks. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Brooks has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Brooks’ conduct, and the fact that Mr. Brooks relinquished his certification prior to the issuance of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Brooks is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Brooks’s temporary bar became effective as of July 26, 2021.

PENNSYLVANIA

Timothy Higgins (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Higgins from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and a one day. This sanction followed Mr. Higgins’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate a guilty plea entered by Mr. Higgins with respect to a 2019 harassment and assault charge filed against him. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Higgins has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Higgins’s conduct, as well as the fact that Mr. Higgins had relinquished his right to use the marks prior to entry of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Temporary Bar wherein Mr. Higgins is temporarily barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. Mr. Higgins’s temporary bar became effective as of July 12, 2021.

UTAH

Donald Blair (Midvale, Utah): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order temporarily barring Mr. Blair from seeking CFP® certification. This discipline followed Mr. Blair’s failure to acknowledge or respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and a second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought information about a 2018 misdemeanor stalking charge against Mr. Blair. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Blair has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Blair’s conduct, as well as the fact that Mr. Blair had already relinquished the CFP® marks prior to the entry of CFP Board’s Order, CFP Board issued a temporary bar, effective as of July 6, 2021.

PERMANENT BAR

MARYLAND

Daniel Jossen (Bethesda, Maryland): In July 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order that permanently barred Mr. Jossen’s ability to obtain CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Jossen’s expiration of his certification and his intentional decision to not respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) within the required timeframe. CFP Board sought to investigate three customer complaints filed against Mr. Jossen in 2020 and 2021; his 2021 resignation from his former firm; and his 2021 bar from associating with a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) member firm. Mr. Jossen did not provide a response to CFP Board’s second NOI within 30 calendar days as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. In accordance with Articles 4.1.a. and 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Jossen is deemed in default, and based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Jossen’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Jossen’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of August 16, 2021.

John Sullivan (Ellicott City, Maryland): In July 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Sullivan from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Sullivan’s intentional failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Sullivan violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards) when he refused to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate Mr. Sullivan’s 2020 termination from his firm under allegations that he accepted a loan from an advisory customer against firm policies and filed an incorrect compliance report regarding that customer loan. Mr. Sullivan declined to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Sullivan has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Sullivan’s conduct, and the fact that Mr. Sullivan allowed his CFP® certification to lapse prior to the issuance of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar wherein Mr. Sullivan is permanently barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks. Mr. Sullivan’s administrative permanent bar became effective as of August 28, 2021.

OHIO

William Dixon (Urbana, Ohio): In July 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Dixon from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Dixon’s intentional failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Dixon was terminated from his firm in 2019 due to his submission of non-genuine client signatures on multiple customer forms. Additionally, CFP Board alleged that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) opened an investigation into Mr. Dixon’s termination. At the conclusion of FINRA’s investigation, Mr. Dixon entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (AWC), on May 11, 2021, in which he was barred from associating with any FINRA member organizations due to, among other reasons, his failure to provide FINRA information and documents it requested during its investigation. CFP Board’s Complaint further alleged that Mr. Dixon’s conduct violated Rules 4.3 and 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Dixon declined to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Dixon has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Dixon’s conduct, and the fact that Mr. Dixon allowed his CFP® certification to lapse prior to the issuance of the Order, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar wherein Mr. Dixon is permanently barred from applying for or obtaining the right to use the CFP® certification marks. Mr. Dixon’s administrative permanent bar became effective as of August 28, 2021.

Richard A. Earls, Sr. (Fairfield Township, Ohio): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Earls from seeking CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Earls’s relinquishment of his certification and his intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Earls violated CFP Board’s Terms and Conditions when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate four federal tax liens filed against Mr. Earls totaling $512,545.77 and five Ohio state tax liens filed against Mr. Earls totaling $61,747.00. Mr. Earls did not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Earls has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, and based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Earls’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Earls’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of June 3, 2021.

OKLAHOMA

Thavaselan Subramaniam (Tulsa, Oklahoma): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Subramaniam from seeking CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Subramaniam’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Subramaniam violated Rule 6.5 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct when he failed to pay his federal tax obligations for years 2015 and 2019 in the total amount of $150,378.00, resulting in the issuance of a federal tax lien. Mr. Subramaniam did not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Subramaniam has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, and based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Subramaniam’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Subramaniam’s administrative permanent bar was effective as of June 10, 2021.

PERMANENT REVOCATION

CALIFORNIA

Scott A. Van Epps (Sacramento, California): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Van Epps’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Van Epps’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Van Epps violated CFP Board’s Terms and Conditions when he refused to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. Mr. Van Epps declined to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Van Epp’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Van Epps’s revocation was effective as of June 10, 2021.

FLORIDA

Robert A. Dow (Melbourne, Florida): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Dow’s rights to use the CFP® marks. This sanction followed Mr. Dow’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Dow violated Rules 6.2 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct based upon Mr. Dow’s two misdemeanor convictions for alcohol related criminal conduct and his allegedly intentional misstatements on his 2018 Ethics Declaration provided to CFP Board. Mr. Dow declined to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Dow has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Dow’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Dow’s revocation was effective as of June 17, 2021.

Jack Stevison, Jr. (Laud by Sea, Florida): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Stevison’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Stevison’s intentional failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate circumstances surrounding Mr. Stevison entering into a February 2020 Cease and Desist Order (Order) with the Florida Office of Financial Regulation (FOFR). In the Order, FOFR found that Mr. Stevison overcharged advisory fees when compared to the fees stated in the investment advisory contracts with his clients. Mr. Stevison refunded his clients all of the unauthorized fees and agreed to cease and desist from any such violations of Florida state law in the future. Mr. Stevison’s conduct may have violated Rule 4.3 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services provided to the client. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Stevison has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Stevison’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Stevison’s revocation was effective as of June 17, 2021.

ILLINOIS

George E. Arocha (Kankakee, Illinois): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Arocha’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Arocha’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged Mr. Arocha failed to pay his tax obligations in three consecutive years causing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to file tax liens against him. Mr. Arocha also failed to pay his federal tax obligations to the IRS between 2015 and 2018 causing him to have an outstanding balance with the IRS not currently included in the tax liens filed against him. CFP Board also alleged that the Illinois Department of Insurance suspended Mr. Arocha’s Illinois insurance producer license due to his outstanding state income taxes and an unfiled state tax return. CFP Board also alleged that Mr. Arocha intentionally made false and misleading statements to CFP Board on his biennial Ethics Declaration to conceal this regulatory action and facilitate the renewal of his certification. CFP Board further alleged that Mr. Arocha’s conduct provided grounds for sanction due to violations of Rule 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, which requires a certificant to meet all CFP Board requirements to retain the right to use the CFP® marks, Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. and Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which states that a CFP® professional may not make false or misleading representations to CFP Board or obstruct CFP Board in the performance of its duties. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Arocha has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Arocha’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Arocha’s revocation was effective as of June 10, 2021.

Daniel McGarry (Geneva, Illinois): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. McGarry’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. McGarry’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. McGarry violated Standard E.5 of CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate three outstanding federal tax liens and two outstanding state tax liens filed against Mr. McGarry. Mr. McGarry declined to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. McGarry has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. McGarry’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. McGarry’s revocation was effective as of July 2, 2021.

NEW YORK

Michael Roy Blueweiss (Huntington Station, New York): In July 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Blueweiss’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Blueweiss’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Blueweiss failed to cooperate with CFP Board’s investigation into a customer complaint alleging that he made unsuitable recommendations of structured notes and a related separation after allegations. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Blueweiss’s conduct violated Rule 6.1 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Blueweiss failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Pursuant to Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Blueweiss has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Blueweiss’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Blueweiss’s revocation was effective as of August 19, 2021.

Larry B. Hughes (Brooklyn, New York): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Hughes’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Hughes’s intentional decision to not timely file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint, which alleged that Mr. Hughes violated Standard E.5 of CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards) when he refused to provide information in response to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s requests for information pertained to the outstanding federal tax lien filed against Mr. Hughes in 2019 and the three outstanding civil judgments filed against him. Mr. Hughes declined to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Hughes has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Hughes’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Hughes’s revocation was effective as of June 24, 2021.

Travis R. Nelson (Merrick, New York): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Nelson’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Nelson’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Nelson was terminated from his employment in 2019 for signing a client’s name without that client’s knowledge or consent. CFP Board alleged that, during a subsequent Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) investigation, Mr. Nelson made false and misleading statements about the circumstances of the termination. After admitting his false and misleading statements, Mr. Nelson was suspended from FINRA in all capacities for 19 months and fined $10,000.00. CFP Board alleged in its Complaint that Mr. Nelson made the same false and misleading statements to CFP Board regarding his termination and also about the FINRA investigation. Mr. Nelson declined to provide an Answer to the CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. In accordance with Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Nelson is in default for failure to provide an Answer to the Complaint. Therefore, pursuant to Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Nelson’s revocation was effective as of May 4, 2021.

Eric P. Storberg (Staten Island, New York): In June 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Storberg’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Storberg violated CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate four federal tax liens filed against Mr. Storberg totaling approximately $360,000. Mr. Storberg did not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. In accordance with Articles 4.1.b. and 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Storberg is deemed in default, and based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Storberg’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Storberg’s revocation was effective as of July 19, 2021.

PENNSYLVANIA

Daryll D. Claxton (Havertown, Pennsylvania): In July 2021, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Claxton’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Claxton’s failure to provide evidence to CFP Board that he was in compliance with a Discretionary Interim Suspension Order issued by the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and that he was no longer using the CFP® certification marks. On November 11, 2020, the Commission issued Mr. Claxton an Interim Suspension Order after the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania charged Mr. Claxton with 50 counts of Child Pornography, three counts of Criminal Attempt-Dissemination Photo/Film of Child Sex Acts, three counts of Dissemination Photo/Film of Child Sex Acts, and one count of Criminal Use of Communication Facility. Pursuant to the terms of the Interim Suspension Order, Mr. Claxton had 45 calendar days from the date the Interim Suspension Order was issued to deliver evidence that he was no longer utilizing the CFP® marks. Mr. Claxton failed to deliver such proof, and under Article 4.1.c. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Claxton has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Claxton’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Claxton’s revocation became effective as of August 1, 2021.

TENNESSEE

William King (Knoxville, Tennessee): In August 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. King’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. King’s intentional failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Mr. King entered into an Offer of Settlement in September 2020 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) whereby Mr. King agreed to be barred from association with any broker, dealer, or investment adviser. Pursuant to the Offer of Settlement, the SEC found that, from August 2015 through September 2018, Mr. King solicited investors to make various investments in a penny stock without disclosing to investors that he received approximately $72,000 in shares as a commission and that he retained approximately $447,000 in shares as fees. This conduct violated Sections 206(2) and 206(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. In connection with the Offer of Settlement, the SEC also found that while he was soliciting investors to make these investments, Mr. King operated as a broker-dealer without being registered to do so. This conduct violated Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC ordered Mr. King to pay disgorgement of $519,634.00, prejudgment interest of $33,388.13 and a civil penalty of $75,000. Mr. King’s conduct violated Rule 4.3 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct, which states that a certificant shall be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements governing professional services provided to the client, and Standard E.3.c. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, which requires a CFP® professional to refrain from adverse conduct. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. King has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. King’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. King’s revocation was effective as of September 3, 2021.

TEXAS

George M. Warner (Rowlett, Texas): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Warner’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction follows Mr. Warner’s failure to provide proof of compliance with an Automatic Interim Suspension imposed by CFP Board after it received evidence that Mr. Warner was permanently barred from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) in all capacities on February 25, 2021. FINRA’s bar was based on its findings that Mr. Warner refused to respond to FINRA’s December 28, 2020 request to produce information and documents, which resulted in FINRA barring Mr. Warner from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Warner’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Warner’s revocation was effective as of June 25, 2021.

Yamara Beck (San Antonio, Texas): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Beck’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Beck’s intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Ms. Beck violated CFP Board’s Terms and Conditions when she failed to satisfy her Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate a federal tax lien in the amount of $440,572. Ms. Beck did not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Beck has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Ms. Beck’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Beck’s revocation was effective as of June 10, 2021.