John Dennis Lowry, Broker with Spartan Capital Securities, Named in FINRA Complaint Alleging Failure to Disclose Arbitration Filings and Resolutions

INVESTORS: Spartan Capital Securities broker John Dennis Lowry was named in a FINRA complaint alleging that he failed to disclose arbitration filings and resolutions

John Dennis Lowry (CRD: 4336146) has been registered as a broker with Spartan Capital Securities since 2008. Previously, Lowry was registered as a broker with Garden State Securities from 2007 until 2008.

Lowry has eleven disclosures on his BrokerCheck report. Two customer disputes filed against Lowery were closed with no action taken. 

December 2021 Customer Dispute

Status: Pending

Allegations: Time Frame: February 2013 through to Present. Alleged Allegations: Churning, Unsuitability, Breach of Fiduciary Contract, Misrepresentation, Unauthorized Trading, Failure to Supervise

Broker Comment: Applicant is not the broker of record and has reported due to the fact that he was named in the clearly erroneous claim that has 13 claimants all with the same clam and incorrectly named RR’s which is factually impossible.

October 2021 Regulatory Judgment

Status: Pending

Initiated By: FINRA

Allegations: Lowry was a named respondent in a FINRA complaint alleging that he willfully failed to amend, or to timely amend, his Form U4 to disclose arbitration filings and resolutions thereof. The complaint alleges that Lowry was named as a respondent in, or was the subject of, multiple consumer-initiated arbitrations alleging that he was involved in one or more sales practice violations. Lowry was obligated to amend his Form U4 to disclose the filing and resolution of each customer arbitration against him within 30 days of learning of the filing and outcome. Despite Lowry being made aware of his disclosure failures, he has still not amended his Form U4 to disclose almost all of the arbitrations against him.

Broker Comment: In claims filed by FINRA, FINRA has wrongfully alleged that certain claims are reportable on the Form U4 of certain principals of the Firm – notwithstanding that they are exempted from reporting under FINRA’s own guidance standards. We have engaged extensively with FINRA to try to resolve these matters, including presenting FINRA with the factual and legal basis as to why these arbitrations are not reportable. More specifically, when a broker-dealer CEO, COO, CCO or CFO is named in an arbitration solely by virtue of their position at the firm, such arbitrations do not need to be reported on the principal’s Form U-4. The decision not to report the arbitrations that are the subject of this enforcement proceeding was done in consultation and supported by multiple compliance offers and several attorneys. Moreover, FINRA has been presented with a study of 962 CEOs named in similar customer claims which illustrated that not in a single instance did a control person make a U4 disclosure based on similar circumstances. Notwithstanding extensive efforts to resolve this matter with FINRA, FINRA has continued to demand a resolution of this matter which is unacceptable and unprecedented.

August 2021 Customer Dispute

Status: Settled

Allegations: Time Frame: August 2015 to September 2015. Alleged Allegations: Unsuitable Investment, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Negligence, Breach of Contract.

Damage Amount Requested: $1,410,000.00

Settlement Amount: $75,000.00

Broker Comment: Claimant filed a claim without regard to the merits (or complete lack thereof) of Claimants’ allegations. The allegations set forth in the SOC are knowingly false, and yet Claimants have instituted this proceeding anyway. While applicant is confident that the Claimants’ claims will be denied, the substantial damage to Respondents has already been done. Therefore, applicant filed a counterclaim seeking to recover the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in the FINRA arbitration, along with the FINRA forum fees, as well as compensatory damages in the amount of no less than $10,000,000 against Claimant, along with punitive damages arising from Claimants tortious conduct. To avoid litigation the claim was settled by the Firm. Applicant made no contribution to the settlement.

June 2020 Customer Dispute

Status: Pending

Allegations: Lowry was named in a customer complaint that asserted the following causes of action: Reasonable-Basis Suitability Obligations to Claimants; Specific Suitability Obligations to Claimants; Quantitative Suitability Obligations to Claimants; Failure to Supervise; and Violations of FINRA Rule 2010.

Damage Amount Requested: $240,000.00

May 2019 Customer Dispute

Status: Settled

Allegations: Claimant filed a counter claim as a retaliation tactic alleging misrepresentations.

Broker Comment: This claim was filed by the company in retaliation to a claim by Spartan Capital for severely past due fees owed to the Firm under an investment banking contract. The claim was settled with the company agreeing to make payments to Spartan due under the original contract. The company and its current CEO later provided an affidavit affirming that the original claims filed by the company were completely false and based on the same, the claims will be expunged.

September 2018 Customer Dispute

Status: Settled

Allegations: Claimant allegations are vague and non-specific claim requesting rescission for authorized purchases.

Damage Amount Requested: $965,180.00

Settlement Amount: $300,000.00

Broker Comment: The claimant still has an account at the Firm. The claimant withdrew his claim against Mr. Lowry in communication with FINRA. Subsequently, the parties executed a settlement agreement and release pursuant to which Mr. Lowry agreed to purchase the subject securities. The agreement required the claimant “to sign all necessary documents to effect the transfer of shares.” The claimant did not take the necessary steps to effect the transfer and no purchase was consummated.

December 2016 Customer Dispute

Status: Award / Judgment

Allegations: There are no specific allegations against applicant. Applicant was solely named due to his position at the Firm with no basis.

Damage Amount Requested: $721,070.00

Damages Granted: $210,000.00

Broker Comment: The unsupported allegations are a specious attempt of a customer to recover market losses. The applicant was named in his role as the CEO and had no direct supervisory responsibility nor contact with the customer.

April 2016 Customer Dispute

Status: Award / Judgment

Allegations: Claimant alleges that his account was mismanaged by his registered representative. There are no specific allegations against the applicant.

Damage Amount Requested: $41,842.00

Damages Granted: $41,842.00

Broker Comment: Mr. Lowry was not the broker on the account nor did he ever have direct contact with the client or have supervisory responsibility in any capacity. He was named in the arbitration solely due to his role at Spartan. A motion is currently pending to dismiss.

December 2015 Customer Dispute

Status: Settled

Allegations: Claimant alleges misrepresentation resulting in losses.

Damage Amount Requested: $163,886.16

Settlement Amount: $35,000.00

Broker Comment: The unsupported allegations are a specious attempt of a customer to recover losses from a 2012 liquidation by the clearing firm of an unpaid, unsolicited trade initiated by the Customer. The applicant was named in an administrative capacity for communicating with the client in an attempt to obtain payment for the sell out transaction and for various other communications confirming to the customers his numerous other unsolicited transactions.

The Sonn Law Group is currently investigating allegations surrounding John Dennis Lowry. 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.