Jan Earl Haynes, Formerly of Integrity Brokerage Services, Named in Customer Dispute Seeking $125K in Damages

Haynes is accused of recommending investments that were complex and illiquid.

Jan Earl Haynes (CRD#: 833875) was registered as a broker with Integrity Brokerage Services from 2017 until 2020. Previously, Haynes was registered as a broker with Centaurus Financial from 2010 until 2016. Haynes entered the securities industry in 1977. Since then, he has been registered as a broker with 20 different brokerage firms.

Haynes has thirteen disclosures on his BrokerCheck report. One customer dispute filed against Haynes was closed with no action taken, and two were denied.

March 2021 Customer Dispute

• Status: Pending
• Allegations: The customer alleges that the Registered Representative recommended illiquid and complex investments. No dates of alleged activity were disclosed in the Statement of Claim.
• Damage Amount Requested: $125,000.00

July 2014 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Misrepresentation
• Damage Amount Requested: $30,714.00
• Settlement Amount: $22,500.00
• Broker Comment: I believe the claims are unwarranted and completely without merit. The investments were appropriate based on the customer’s financial situation, investment objectives and risk tolerance level at the time of purchase. The customer received each prospectus prior to making the investment and was fully aware of the characteristics, including all of the risk factors. The investment specifics/characteristics were present in the written documentation given to the client and were discussed verbally with the client, with signed documentation by the client confirming the same.

July 2014 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentations and omissions, negligence, breach of contract.
• Damage Amount Requested: $50,000.00
• Settlement Amount: $13,000.00
• Broker Comment: I believe the claims are unwarranted and completely without merit. The investments were appropriate based on the customer’s financial situation, investment objectives and risk tolerance level at the time of purchase. The customer received each prospectus prior to making the investment and was fully aware of the characteristics, including all of the risk factors. The investment specifics/characteristics were present in the written documentation given to the client and were discussed verbally with the client, with signed documentation by the client confirming the same.

November 2012 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Client claims unsuitable recommendations, misrepresentation of risks, unauthorized trading, churning, fraud and elder abuse for equity transactions that occurred in her account between January 2011 and July 2012.
• Damage Amount Requested: $62,219.15
• Settlement Amount: $10,000.00
• Broker Comment: [Customer] was an active participant in all decisions, based on her continual monitoring of market news on CNBC, as well as of her account online. The information she saw on CNBC was usually the subject of our phone calls, most of which were initiated by her. Investments made at her sole request were marked unsolicited: solicited investments were discussed at length prior to submission.

November 2006 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Negligence, failure to supervise, suitability and churning.
• Damage Amount Requested: $2,202,000.00
• Settlement Amount: $195,000.00
• Broker Comment: RR denies all the allegations. RR was the branch office manager at the time and had no direct contact with the claimant.

March 2006 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Customer alleges unsuitability in connection with the trading in his account.
• Damage Amount Requested: $50,000.00
• Settlement Amount: $15,000.00
• Broker Comment: The firm and the broker deny the allegations. The matter was settled so as to avoid the time and expense of litigation and not as an admission of liability. The customer sought to blame others for his own investment decisions.

November 1997 Regulatory Judgment

• Status: Final
• Initiated By: IN
• Allegations: On November 13, 1997 The Indiana Securities Commissioner ordered Haynes to submit a detailed written explanation of the disciplinary and/or legal matters that appear on his disciplinary history. He had 90 days in which to respond. Haynes failed to respond to the order.
• Resolution: Order
• Sanctions: Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
• Sanction Details: On February 19, 1998 the Indiana Securities Commissioner issued findings of fact, conclusions of law, and final order denyin the registration of Haynes.
• Broker Comment: I applied for registration with the State of Indiana on Oct 21, 1997. On November 13, 1997 I received a request for additional information. Because I did not have access to pertinent information from 2 former employers & because I did not intend to do business in Indiana I requested my I. Robbins securities compliance officer to withdraw my application. I was told by J.Robbins Securities that the application had been withdrawn & I did not need to take further action. On 02/19/1998 I received the denial from Indiana.

October 1996 Customer Dispute

• Status: Settled
• Allegations: Complaint was initiated against RAS- I was not named & was not included in negotiations or settlement. Customer claimed unauthorized margin trading & trading inconsistent with her investment objective-unauthorized trading-damages in the amount of $19,332.00 
• Damage Amount Requested: $19,532.14
• Settlement Amount: $11,000.00
• Broker Comment: Settlement of $11,001.00 All trades were authorized all recommendations made to [customer] were approved by RAS management. All investments presented to the customer met her stated investment objectives. All trades were made with her full understanding & authorization.

December 1994 Customer Dispute

• Status: Award/Judgment
• Allegations: Customers alleged unsuitable recommendations, failure to follow instructions and in one instance purchased shares without authority.
• Damages Granted: $3,200.00
• Broker Comment: Arbitrator decided in full final resolution as follows- respondents are jointly & severally liable for & paid by Dickinson & Co., $3,200. All other claims were dismissed. No action was imposed by NASD.

December 1989 Customer Dispute

• Status: Award/Judgment
• Allegations: Mishandling of account- 499,000.00
• Damage Amount Requested: $499,000.00
• Damages Granted: $29,755.00
• Broker Comment: Bateman Eichler Hill Richards & Jan Haynes were jointly and severally liable to pay claimant $29,755.00. Bateman Eichler paid liability & all costs involved. No action was imposed by NASD. Not provided.

Contact Us Today

The Sonn Law Group is currently investigating allegations surrounding Jan Earl Haynes. We represent investors in claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms. If you or your loved one experienced investment losses, we are here to help. For a free consultation, please call us now at 866-827-3202 or complete our contact form.