DOMINIC JOHN GUIDO is currently employed as a Broker and/or Investment Adviser at WELLS FARGO CLEARING SERVICES, LLC located at 1 PENN PLZ FL 27, NEW YORK, NY, 10119.
DOMINIC JOHN GUIDO has worked at WELLS FARGO CLEARING SERVICES, LLC since August 22, 2000
Disclosure History
DOMINIC JOHN GUIDO has 7 Disclosure Event(s).
Date: May 10, 2005 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: VIRGINIA CLIENTS CLAIMED THAT IN DECEMBER 2004 AND JANUARY 2005 THEY SOLD VARIOUS MUTUAL FUNDS (ONE FUND WITHOUT THEIR AUTHORIZATION) THAT THEY HELD IN THEIR ACCOUNTS TO PURCHASE TWO PACIFIC LIFE VALUE STEPPED-UP DB VARIABLE ANNUITIES. THE CLIENTS FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THE FA ASSURED THEM THAT THE ANNUITIES HAD PRINCIPAL GUARANTEES. THE CLIENTS CLAIMED THAT THEY LATER DISCOVERED THAT THEY HAD TO HOLD THE ANNUITIES FOR TEN YEARS FOR THE PRINCIPAL TO BE GUARANTEED. THE CLIENTS ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE FA FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR INVESTMENT IN THE ANNUITIES AND THAT THE ANNUITIES WERE UNSUITABLE FOR THEM. THE CLIENTS INVESTED $56,388 IN ONE ANNUITY IN DECEMBER 2004; AND $78,500 IN A SECOND ANNUITY FOR THEIR JOINT ACCOUNT IN JANUARY 2005. THE CLIENTS HAVE REQUESTED THAT THE TRADES BE REVERSED AND THEIR ACCOUNTS BE RESTORED TO THE SAME STATUS THAT EXISTED PRIOR TO THEIR PURCHASE OF THE ANNUITIES. DAMAGES ARE REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $5,000. Damage Amount Requested: $5,001.00 Broker Comment: THE FIRM DENIED THE COMPLAINT. BASED UPON THE FIRM'S RECORDS AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE FA, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE CLIENTS' DID NOT AUTHORIZE THE SALES OF THEIR MUTUAL FUNDS TO INVEST IN THE PACIFIC VALUE VARIABLE ANNUITIES FOR THEIR ACCOUNTS. FURTHER, THE FA EXPLAINED TO THE CLIENT(S) THAT THE GUARANTEED PROTECTION ADVANTAGE RIDER THAT THEY HAD SELECTED WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE ANNUITIES WOULD PROTECT THEIR FIRST YEAR INVESTMENTS (LESS ANY MONEY WITHDRAWN) IN THE ANNUITIES AS LONG AS THEY STAYED 100% INVESTED FOR TEN YEARS IN THE ANNUITIES USING PACIFIC LIFE'S PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION SERVICE (THIS INFORMATION WAS ALSO SET-FORTH IN THE ANNUITY CONTRACTS). THE FA EXPLAINED THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH AN INVESTMENT IN THE ANNUITIES TO THE CLIENT(S) AND THEIR SUB-ACCOUNT ASSET ALLOCATIONS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THEIR INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES AND RISK TOLERANCE. AT THE TIME THE FIRM DENIED THE COMPLAINT, THE CONTRACT VALUES FOR THE CLIENTS' ANNUITIES WERE ESTIMATED TO BE $58,666.89 AND $83,128.65 RESPECTIVELY.
Date: February 21, 2001 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CLIENT ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADES AND WAS MISLEAD REGARDING PURCHASES OF STOCK. LOSSES WERE NOT SPECIFIED BUT WERE BELIEVED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $5,000. Broker Comment: I DENY THE ALLEGATIONS.
Date: April 14, 1994 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CHURNING, SUITABILITY; ALLEGED DAMAGES$217,062.00 Damage Amount Requested: $217,062.00 Settlement Amount: $140,000.00 Broker Comment: THIS MATTER WAS SETTLED FOR $140,000.00 TO AVOIDTHE TIME AND EXPENSE OF TRYING THE CASE.THE CLAIMANT'S LATE HUSBAND WAS MY CLIENT FOROVER 15 YEARS, DURING WHICH TIME THERE WAS NEVER A COMPLAINT.IN 1987, BEFORE THE HUSBAND BECAME INCAPACITATED, HE GAVEWRITTEN DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATION TO HIS STEPSON, ASOPHISTICATED MIDDLE-AGE BUSINESSMAN. THE CLAIMANT SUBSEQUENTLYGAVE THIS WRITTEN DISCRETIONARY AUTHORIZATION AT THREEDIFFERENT BROKERAGE FIRMS. I DID NOT HAVE DISCRETIONARYAUTHORITY. I FOLLOWED THE STEPSON'S INSTRUCTIONS AND ORDERS.OVER THE YEARS THE STEPSON MADE SIGNIFICANT CASH WITHDRAWALS.THIS WAS ALL DONE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND WRITTEN CONSENT OF THECLAIMANT. THE CLAIMANT'S ALLEGATIONS ARE WITHOUT MERIT. 9A. WHAT FIRM DID THE TRANSACTION TAKE PLACE? SMITH BARNEYINC.
Date: February 24, 1985 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CLIENT ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADING ANDSUITABILITY IN ACCOUNT. COMPLAINT RELATES TO PETRO LEWIS ANDNICHOLAS OIL & GAS, WHICH WERE PAINE WEBBER'S RECOMMEDATIONS.COMPLAINT ALLEGES DAMAGES OF 5 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS. Damage Amount Requested: $350,000.00 Settlement Amount: $50,000.00 Broker Comment: AN UNDISCLOSED MONETARY SETTLEMENT WAS MADE TOTHE CLIENT BY PAINE WEBBER. DOMINIC GUIDO WAS RESPONSIBLE FORNONE OF THE AWARD. MR. GUIDO HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF THESETTLEMENT FIGURE AS PAINE WEBBER DID NOT DISCLOSE IT TO HIM.Not Provided
Date: January 25, 1985 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CLIENT ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED TRADING ANDSUITABILITY IN ACCOUNT. COMPLAINT RELATES TO PETRO LEWIS ANDNICHOLAS OIL & GAS, WHICH WERE PAINE WEBBER'S RECOMMEDATIONS.COMPLAINT ALLEGES DAMAGES OF 5 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS. Damage Amount Requested: $5,500,000.00 Broker Comment: AN UNDISCLOSED MONETARY SETTLEMENT WAS MADE TOTHE CLIENT BY PAINE WEBBER. DOMINIC GUIDO WAS RESPONSIBLE FORNONE OF THE AWARD. MR. GUIDO HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF THESETTLEMENT FIGURE AS PAINE WEBBER DID NOT DISCLOSE IT TO HIM.Not Provided
Date: June 25, 1984 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: ALLEGED PAINE WEBBER & DOMINIC GUIDOMISMANAGED THEIR ACCOUNT. THE CLIENT SUED FOR $400,000 FORUNAUTHORIZED TRADING & SUITABILITY IN CONNECTION WITH HISPURCHASE OF PETRO LEWIS & NICHOLAS OIL & GAS WHICH WERE PAINEWEBBER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. Damage Amount Requested: $400,000.00 Damages Granted: $17,500.00 Broker Comment: NYSE AWARDED [CUSTOMERS]$17,500 PLUS COSTS. I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR $2,500 OF THE AWARD.NOT PROVIDED
Date: January 05, 1983 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CUSTOMER ALLEGED MISMANAGEMENT OF ACCOUNT.THE COMPLAINT RELATED TO PAINE WEBBER RECOMMENDED OIL ISSUES.CLIENT FILED COMPLAINT FOR ALLEGED DAMAGES OF $390,000. Damage Amount Requested: $390,000.00 Settlement Amount: $67,500.00 Broker Comment: A PAYMENT OF $67,500 WAS MADE TO [CUSTOMER]IN SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS. DOMINIC GUIDO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR NONEOF THE AWARD.NOT PROVIDED
More Information
All individuals registered to sell securities or provide investment advice are required to disclose customer complaints and arbitrations, regulatory actions, employment terminations, bankruptcy filings and criminal or civil judicial proceedings.
A disclosure includes information about customer disputes, disciplinary events and financial matters on the broker's record as reported by securities regulators, the individual broker, and any involved firms. Some of these items may involve pending actions or allegations that have not been resolved or proven. The presence of a disclosure does not automatically indicate any wrongdoing.
BrokerCheck is the source of the data included in this Report. The data was compiled on June 29, 2018.
To view the full report for DOMINIC JOHN GUIDO, click here.
The use of BrokerCheck data is subject to the BrokerCheck Terms of Use.
×
Outdated Information
If you discover any errors or outdated information on this Website, please contact us and we will promptly correct such errors or outdated information.
If BrokerCheck® is the source of such errors or outdated information, please contact FINRA at (301) 590-6500.
×
BrokerSearch Removal
Brokersearch.info will not fully remove items from this Website without an applicable court order designating them for removal. Investors rely on the information available on this Website to decide whether to choose or retain a broker or investment adviser.
Upon written request, we may remove certain page(s) from appearing in search engine results using the robots.txt protocol.
When a person searches for your name using Google, Bing, Yahoo! and other search engines the page(s) from Brokersearch.info would not appear in the search results.
Please contact us to learn more about Search Engine Removal.