ERIC ANDREW DITON is currently employed as a Broker and/or Investment Adviser at MORGAN STANLEY located at 58 SOUTH SERVICE ROAD, SUITE 400, MELVILLE, NY, 11747.
ERIC ANDREW DITON has worked at MORGAN STANLEY since June 01, 2009
ERIC ANDREW DITON has 4 Disclosure Event(s).
Date: May 09, 2008 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: THE COMPLAINT AROSE OUT OF THE SALE OF AN AUCTION RATE SECURITY (ARS) THAT WAS MADE PRIOR TO THE WIDESPREAD ILLIQUIDITY IN THE ARS MARKET THAT OCCURRED IN FEBRUARY 2008. Settlement Amount: $875,000.00 Broker Comment: THIS WAS A MANDATED SETTLEMENT TO CLIENTS OF NUMEROUS FIRMS HOLDING THESE SECURITIES. THIS WAS NOT A DIRECT SETTLEMENT FOR ANY PERSONAL WRONGDOING. THE COMPLAINT WAS ONE OF THE MANY IN THE FINANCIAL SERVICES INDUSTRY DUE TO THE BREAKDOWN IN LIQUIDITY IN THE AUCTION RATE SECURITIES MARKET IN FEBRUARY, 2008. THIS WAS AN AUCTION MARKET THAT FUNCTIONED WITH LIQUIDITY FOR OVER 20 YEARS, BUT SUDDENLY DRIED UP AS A RESULT OF THE GLOBAL CREDIT CRISIS. THE CLIENT ULTIMATELY RECEIVED ALL OF HIS INTEREST AND PRINCIPAL AS PART OF A GLOBAL, INDUSTRY-WIDE REPURCHASE AGREEMENT. HE DID NOT EXPERIENCE ANY FINANCIAL LOSS. IN FACT, THE CLIENT RECEIVED VERY HIGH RATES OF INTEREST FROM SOME OF THESE SECURITIES, WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO PAY PUNITIVE RATES OF INTEREST TO THE HOLDER IN THE EVENT OF A FAILED AUCTION. I DID NOT, NOR WAS I ASKED TO, PERSONALLY PARTICIPATE IN THE SETTLEMENT IN ANY WAY. THE CLIENT ULTIMATELY THANKED ME FOR MY GREAT SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE CRISIS, AND OUR RELATIONSHIP WAS VERY STRONG.
Date: March 28, 2006 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: IN A LETTER TO THE REGISTERED REP, CLIENT WRITES, "THE [MANAGED] ACCOUNTS WERE NOT SUITABLE FOR ME FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND THEY WERE NOT MANAGED IN AN APPROPRIATE FASHION CONSIDERING THE HIGH FEES INVOLVED FOR ALMOST SIX YEARS." TIME PERIOD IS 1999 PRESENT. ALLEGED DAMAGES ESTIMATED TO EXCEED $5,000 Settlement Amount: $4,500.00 Broker Comment: I BELIEVE THAT THE CLIENT'S COMPLAINT IS WITHOUT MERIT. HE MADE INDEPENDENT INVESTMENT DECISIONS, AND AT TIMES CONTRARY TO MY RECOMMENDATIONS. HIS ACCOUNT PERFORMANCE CORRELATES TO MARKET PERFORMANCE FOR THE PERIOD IN QUESTION.
Date: March 20, 2000 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CUSTOMERS ALLEGE THAT THEY INFORMED FA THEY DID NOT WANT THE UITS TO CONTINUE BEYOND 1/10/00, AND THAT FA DID NOT LIQUIDATE THOSE INVESTMENTS. Damage Amount Requested: $10,500.00 Settlement Amount: $3,500.00 Broker Comment: THE CLIENTS FAXED ME A LETTER INSTRUCTING ME NOT TO ROLL OVER THEIR UNIT TRUSTS FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. I EXPLICITLY FOLLOWED THEIR ORDERS, AND THE TRUSTS WERE NOT ROLLED OVER. THE CLIENTS MISTAKENLY THOUGHT THAT THE TRUSTS WOULD BE LIQUIDATED UPON RECEIPT OF THEIR FAX. HOWEVER, THEIR FAX CLEARLY STATED THAT I SHOULD NOT ROLL OVER THE TRUSTS. IT DID NOT TELL ME TO IMMEDIATELY LIQUIDATE THE TRUSTS. THEREFORE, AS PER PROSPECTUS, THE TRUSTS SELF-LIQUIDATED ABOUT 5 WEEKS LATER. DURING THOSE 5 WEEKS, THE TRUSTS DECLINED IN VALUE. HAD THE CLIENTS INSTRUCTED ME TO SELL THEIR UNIT TRUSTS, I WOULD HAVE DONE SO. AFTER OVER 14 YEARS AS AN INVESTMENT EXECUTIVE, I HAVE LEARNED THAT IT IS VITAL TO FOLLOW CUSTOMER ORDERS PRECISELY, WHICH IS WHAT I DID IN THIS SITUATION.
Date: November 15, 1993 Category: Customer Dispute Allegations: CUSTOMER ALLEGED THAT PURCHASES IN HERACCOUNT COULD HAVE BEEN MORE PRUDENT. ALLEGED $30,000 LOSS OR16%. Damage Amount Requested: $30,000.00 Settlement Amount: $14,900.00 Broker Comment: SETTLED FOR $14,900.CUSTOMER TOLD THE BROKER AT THE ONSET THAT SHEWANTED TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE WITH THIS PORTION OF HER FUNDS.MOST OF HER MONEY WAS IN CONSERVATIVE BONDS. WHEN THE ACCOUNTWAS UP IN THE FIRST YEAR, SHE WAS HAPPY. WHEN STOCK MARKETADVERSITY COUSED IT TO DECLINE, SHE COMPLAINED. WHEN THEACCOUNT STARTED DROPPING, THE BROKER RECOMMENDED REDUCING RISKBY BUYING TREASURY BONDS. THE CUSTOMER REJECTED THIS ADVICE ANUMBER OF TIMES, PREFERRING TO TRY TO MAKE IT BACK. THE ACCOUNTWAS CODED "SPECULATIVE" AND APPROVED BY THE CUSTOMER.
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 ERIC ANDREW DITON, click here.
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.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.
How to choose a broker or investment adviser. Learn More