Meridian, ID | January 18, 2026
Idaho broker Jason Steven Hawke (CRD# 4177415) was terminated by D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP on August 19, 2025, after the firm alleged he “deliberately falsified a client’s address on account documents in order to have an investment processed” while not registered in the client’s state of residence. This termination represents the fourth time in Hawke’s career that he’s been discharged or permitted to resign following allegations of misconduct, and it comes on the heels of a 2019 Idaho state regulatory action for repeated failures to disclose private securities transactions.
According to his FINRA BrokerCheck record, Hawke—who is no longer registered in the securities industry—faces eight customer complaint disclosures totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in settlements, four employment terminations for cause, one state regulatory sanction with a $10,000 fine and 30-day suspension, and one criminal charge. The pattern reveals a troubling history of compliance failures, particularly involving private placements, undisclosed transactions, and state registration violations.
BrokerCheck Snapshot
Name: Jason Steven Hawke
CRD #: 4177415
Former Firm: D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP
Location: Meridian, Idaho
Years in Industry: 26
Number of Disclosures: 14 (8 customer disputes, 4 terminations, 1 regulatory action, 1 criminal charge)
Current Status: Not Currently Registered
The 2025 Termination: Falsifying Client Information
D.H. Hill Securities’ Allegations
Termination Date: August 19, 2025
Reason: Deliberate falsification of client address information
According to the firm’s disclosure:
“The firm found evidence during an investigation that Mr. Hawke deliberately falsified a client’s address on account documents in order to have an investment processed as Mr. Hawke was not registered in the client’s state of residence.”
This allegation represents one of the most serious forms of securities misconduct—intentionally falsifying documents to circumvent registration requirements.
Hawke’s Defense
Hawke vigorously disputes the firm’s allegations, stating:
“Mr. Hawke denies these allegations and disputes the firm’s characterization of the events. He maintains that no misconduct occurred and that no inaccurate information was knowingly or intentionally provided. The individual intends to pursue arbitration to contest the allegations and seek expungement. No regulatory, judicial, or arbitral determination has been made.”
The Investigation That Led to Termination
The termination stemmed from a client complaint filed on July 1, 2025, alleging an unsuitable recommendation involving a “fee simple investment” purchased in December 2022, with alleged damages of $200,000.
According to Hawke’s statement in that complaint disclosure:
“Firm investigated complaint and found investment to be suitable for client. Client did not request compensation as investigation into complaint evolved into an internal investigation into representative.”
This suggests that while investigating the suitability complaint, the firm discovered evidence of the alleged address falsification, shifting focus from the investment recommendation to what the firm viewed as deliberate document fraud.
Understanding the Alleged Violation
State Registration Requirements
Brokers can only conduct securities business with clients who reside in states where they’re properly registered. This registration requirement:
- Protects investors by ensuring brokers meet state qualification standards
- Allows state regulators to supervise broker activities within their jurisdiction
- Creates accountability through state enforcement mechanisms
- Prevents brokers from evading stricter state regulations
Why Falsifying Addresses Is Serious
If the firm’s allegations are accurate, falsifying a client’s address to circumvent state registration requirements represents:
Fraud – Intentionally providing false information on official documents
Regulatory Evasion – Deliberately bypassing registration requirements
Investor Harm – Denying clients the protection of their state’s securities laws
Document Falsification – Creating false records that could affect tax reporting, disclosures, and other legal matters
Such conduct could potentially trigger additional regulatory investigations by state securities regulators and FINRA.
The Timing Problem
Hawke was terminated in August 2025 and is no longer registered. His intent to “pursue arbitration to contest the allegations and seek expungement” faces significant obstacles:
- Expungement is rarely granted and requires extraordinary circumstances
- Without active registration, his incentive to pursue expungement diminishes
- The firm’s investigation and documentation may provide strong evidence
- Multiple prior terminations and regulatory violations undermine credibility
A Pattern of Private Securities Transaction Violations
The 2025 termination is far from Hawke’s first compliance failure. His record reveals a disturbing pattern of engaging in private securities transactions without proper firm notification—a violation he’s committed repeatedly despite sanctions.
2019 Idaho Department of Finance Action
Case: 2019-7-06
Action Date: September 27, 2019
Sanction: 30-day suspension, $10,000 fine, cease and desist order, five-year compliance consultant requirement
Allegations: Hawke violated FINRA Rule 3280 by personally participating in a private securities transaction involving a conservation easement without giving National Securities Corporation prior written notice.
Critical Detail from Regulator:
“THE DEPARTMENT HAD PREVIOUSLY ISSUED A LETTER OF CENSURE TO MR. HAWKE FOR FAILURE TO NOTIFY HIS PRIOR BROKER-DEALER ABOUT PARTICIPATION IN A PRIVATE SECURITIES TRANSACTION.”
This means Hawke had been previously censured for the same type of violation before the 2019 formal action—making this at least his second private securities transaction violation before the regulatory sanction.
Additional Sanctions:
Beyond the suspension and fine, Hawke was required to “hire an independent compliance consultant to conduct an annual examination of his investment advisory business for a period of five years”—an unusual and expensive sanction reserved for serious, repeated violations.
2019 Termination from National Securities Corporation
Termination Date: March 20, 2019 (just months before the Idaho regulatory action)
Reason: Failed to notify firm prior to engaging in private securities transactions
From the firm’s disclosure:
“Registered representative failed to notify the Firm prior to engaging in Private Securities Transactions in accordance with the Firm’s policies and procedures. The transactions did not involve any clients of the Firm.”
Hawke’s Explanation:
“I made a personal real estate investment in a conservation easement in December for tax planning. I did not solicit or conduct any private securities transactions with clients. I was approved for real estate investments as an outside business activity and believed no further notice was required.”
2011 Termination from J.P. Turner
Termination Date: July 6, 2011
Reason: “Violation of firm policy and industry rules related to commission payments and an unapproved private securities transaction”
This represents Hawke’s first termination for private securities transaction violations—nearly a decade before the most recent incidents.
The Pattern Is Clear
Hawke has been:
- Terminated for private securities violations in 2011
- Previously censured by Idaho regulators (date unclear but before 2019)
- Terminated for private securities violations in 2019
- Formally sanctioned by Idaho with suspension and fine in 2019
- Required to hire compliance consultant for five years (2019-2024)
- Terminated for allegedly falsifying client address in 2025
This pattern demonstrates either:
- Repeated intentional violations of clearly understood rules
- Fundamental inability or unwillingness to comply with industry regulations
- Reckless disregard for compliance requirements despite multiple warnings
Eight Customer Complaints: A Troubling Record
Hawke’s BrokerCheck record includes eight customer complaints, five of which resulted in settlements totaling approximately $157,000.
Settled Complaints
Complaint #1: Oil & Gas Partnership
Filed: March 8, 2010 (FINRA Case #10-01146)
Firm: J.P. Turner & Company, LLC
Product: Oil & Gas
Alleged Damages: $300,000
Settlement: $50,000
Hawke’s Contribution: $43,750 (87.5% of settlement)
Allegations: Negligence, unsuitability, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation, and failure to perform due diligence
Context: This was initially a written complaint for $225,000 filed in February 2010 that was denied. The client then filed arbitration in March 2010 increasing the claim to $300,000.
The fact that Hawke personally contributed $43,750—an extraordinarily high percentage of the settlement—suggests serious concerns about his conduct. Most settlements are paid entirely by firm insurance with no broker contribution.
Complaint #2 & #3: Private Placements, Penny Stocks, Real Estate
Filed: June 4, 2014 (FINRA Case #14-01566)
Firm: J.P. Turner & Company, LLC
Products: Private placements, penny stocks, real estate securities
Alleged Damages: $50,000-$75,000 each
Combined Settlement: $35,000 ($17,500 each)
Hawke’s Contribution: $0
Allegations: Misrepresentation, unsuitability, negligence, common law fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty
These appear to be two related claimants with similar allegations filed around the same time.
Complaint #4: Inland Western REIT
Filed: December 26, 2012 (FINRA Case #12-03893)
Firm: LPL Financial (investment made in 2004)
Product: REIT (Inland Western)
Alleged Damages: $60,000
Settlement: $2,000 (nominal settlement)
Hawke’s Contribution: $0
Allegations: Unsuitability
Firm’s Statement: “The settlement is a compromise of disputed claims and does not constitute an admission or evidence of liability… The firm elected to settle this claim for a nominal amount to avoid the costs and uncertainty of arbitration.”
The minimal settlement suggests weak claims, but Inland Western REITs have been problematic investments subject to numerous investor complaints industry-wide.
Complaint #5: Private Placement
Filed: March 9, 2020 (FINRA Case #20-00790)
Firm: National Securities Corporation
Product: Private Placement
Alleged Damages: $100,000
Settlement: $45,000
Hawke’s Contribution: $0
Allegations: Suitability
Denied/Closed Complaints
Complaint #6: Real Estate Securities
Filed: April 25, 2011
Firm: J.P. Turner
Product: Real Estate Security
Alleged Damages: Not specified (firm couldn’t determine if less than $5,000)
Allegations: Misrepresentation and unsuitable investment
Disposition: Closed/No Action
Complaint #7: Real Estate Securities
Filed: December 1, 2011
Firm: J.P. Turner
Product: Real Estate Security
Alleged Damages: $100,000
Allegations: Unsuitable recommendations
Disposition: Closed/No Action
Complaint #8: Fee Simple Investment
Filed: July 1, 2025
Firm: D.H. Hill Securities
Product: Fee Simple Investment
Alleged Damages: $200,000
Allegations: Unsuitable recommendation
Disposition: Closed/No Action
This is the complaint that triggered the investigation leading to Hawke’s termination for alleged address falsification.
Pattern Analysis
The complaints reveal concerning patterns:
Product Concentration – Heavy focus on alternative investments: private placements, oil & gas partnerships, REITs, real estate securities—all illiquid, complex, and risky
Repeated Allegations – Consistent themes of unsuitability, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and failure to perform due diligence
Substantial Settlements – Over $157,000 paid to settle claims, with Hawke personally contributing nearly $44,000
J.P. Turner Concentration – Four of the eight complaints involve conduct at J.P. Turner, where Hawke worked from 2008-2011
Personal Contributions – The $43,750 personal contribution to the oil & gas settlement is highly unusual and suggests either serious misconduct or significant leverage by claimants
Jason Hawke’s Career and Qualifications
Despite the extensive disclosure history, Hawke held impressive credentials including principal qualifications.
Securities Licenses
Principal/Supervisory Exams:
- Series 24 – General Securities Principal (passed July 22, 2003)
- Series 26 – Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Principal (passed June 9, 2001)
General Industry/Product Exams:
- Series 3 – National Commodity Futures (passed October 31, 2013)
- Series 6 – Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Representative (passed June 12, 2000)
- Series 7 – General Securities Representative (passed June 10, 2003)
- SIE – Securities Industry Essentials (passed October 1, 2018)
State Securities Law Exams:
- Series 63 – Uniform Securities Agent State Law (passed June 3, 2000)
- Series 65 – Uniform Investment Adviser Law (passed September 26, 2011)
- Series 66 – Uniform Combined State Law (passed June 7, 2004)
The Series 24 and Series 26 principal qualifications are particularly notable—these licenses authorize supervision of other brokers and are typically held only by branch managers and compliance personnel. The fact that someone with principal qualifications repeatedly violated basic compliance rules about private securities transactions is especially troubling.
Employment History
Most Recent:
- D.H. Hill Securities, LLLP (October 2020 – August 2025) – Meridian/Kingwood – Terminated for alleged address falsification
Prior Firms:
- National Securities Corporation (October 2011 – March 2019) – Meridian, ID – Terminated for private securities violations
- Newbridge Securities Corporation (July 2011 – September 2011) – Meridian, ID
- J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. (May 2008 – August 2011) – Meridian, ID – Permitted to resign for commission and private securities violations
- LPL Financial Corporation (February 2003 – May 2008) – Meridian, ID
- World Group Securities, Inc. (April 2002 – February 2003) – Duluth, GA
- WMA Securities, Inc. (June 2000 – April 2002) – Duluth, GA
Outside Business Activities
Hawke disclosed multiple outside business activities, some investment-related:
- Hawke Financial Group LLC – Owner, CCO & Investment Adviser Representative; SEC registered RIA; approximately 140 hours/month during trading hours
- JPT Properties LLC – Real estate, property management; President & Owner; 2 hours/month
- Livestock Cattle Business – Buying calves, feeding and selling to meat contractor; Owner & Partner; 1 hour/month
- Stonebriar Homeowners Association, Inc. – Treasurer of non-profit; 5 hours/month
The extensive time commitment to his RIA (140 hours/month) while also working for D.H. Hill Securities raises questions about divided attention and potential conflicts.
The Criminal Charge: Petty Theft
Hawke’s record includes a 2003-2004 criminal charge for petty theft that was dismissed.
Case: M0400379, District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Ada County, Idaho
Charge Date: December 31, 2003
Charge: Petty Theft (Class D Misdemeanor)
Disposition: Dismissed at pre-trial with bond forfeiture (March 11, 2004)
Hawke’s Statement:
“Matter involved mistaken use of movie theatre tickets delivered to the accused’s office. Offered to resolve matter with complainant, who refused and pressed charges.”
While this was resolved without conviction over 20 years ago and appears unrelated to his securities business, it’s part of the overall disclosure picture investors should know about.
Recovery Options for Investment Fraud and Misconduct
If you’ve experienced losses due to investment fraud, broker misconduct, unsuitable recommendations, or misrepresentation, you may be entitled to recover your losses through FINRA arbitration.
Patil Law, P.C. has over 15 years of experience representing investors in FINRA arbitration and securities litigation, with more than $25 million recovered for clients across 1,000+ cases. We provide a free, confidential consultation to review your potential claim. Our firm works on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no attorney fees unless we successfully recover money for you.
Understanding FINRA Arbitration
FINRA arbitration is a streamlined dispute resolution process for securities-related claims. It offers a faster, more cost-effective alternative to traditional court litigation. Most cases are resolved within 12-16 months. Claims generally must be filed within six years of the incident.
Cases involving brokers with extensive disclosure histories like Hawke’s may be stronger because:
- Patterns of similar complaints support credibility
- Previous settlements suggest recognized problems
- Regulatory actions provide evidence of rule violations
- Multiple terminations indicate serious compliance issues
Resources for Idaho Investors
For more information about complaints and disclosures involving D.H. Hill Securities, National Securities Corporation, and related cases, see:
- D.H. Hill Securities Advisors – Complaints & Disclosures
- Investment Fraud Claims
- Broker Misconduct Cases
- Private Placement Losses
Red Flags Every Investor Should Recognize
Understanding what extensive disclosure histories reveal
When a broker’s BrokerCheck record shows multiple customer complaints, terminations, and regulatory actions, it reveals a pattern that investors ignore at their peril. A single complaint in a long career might be a misunderstanding or frivolous claim. But when you see eight complaints, four terminations, and regulatory sanctions involving similar issues over many years, you’re looking at systematic problems. Before entrusting your money to any financial professional, spend ten minutes on FINRA BrokerCheck—it’s free, easy to use, and could save you from devastating losses. A broker like Hawke, with 14 total disclosures including repeated violations of the same rules despite sanctions, should raise immediate red flags.
The significance of personal contributions to settlements
When brokers personally contribute to settlement payments—as Hawke did by paying $43,750 toward the oil & gas complaint settlement—it signals serious problems. Most settlements are paid entirely by firm insurance with no broker contribution. Firms and their insurers only require personal contributions when: the misconduct was particularly egregious; the broker violated clear firm policies; the evidence strongly favored the claimant; or insurance wouldn’t cover certain types of wrongdoing. A broker willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars personally rather than fight a claim likely knew the evidence was damning. View personal contributions as red flags suggesting the allegations had substantial merit.
Private securities transaction violations and what they mean
FINRA Rule 3280 requires brokers to provide written notice to their firms before participating in any private securities transactions, even personal investments in certain cases. The rule exists to allow firms to supervise activities that could create conflicts, expose clients to unsuitable investments, or involve fraud. Hawke violated this rule repeatedly—in 2011, again before 2019 (per the censure), in 2019 (leading to termination and state sanctions), and potentially in the 2025 termination. Repeated private securities transaction violations suggest either: willful disregard for compliance rules; inability to understand basic regulatory requirements; or deliberate concealment of problematic activities from supervisors. None of these explanations should give investors confidence.
The warning signs of alternative investment concentration
Review Hawke’s customer complaints: oil & gas partnerships, private placements, penny stocks, REITs, real estate securities, conservation easements, fee simple investments. Notice what’s missing? Common stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs—the bread-and-butter investments most investors should hold. When a broker’s complaint history concentrates heavily in alternative investments, ask yourself: Is this broker pushing products for their high commissions rather than their suitability? Do I really need illiquid, complex, high-risk alternatives? Am I sophisticated enough to understand what I’m buying? Often, alternative investment concentration reflects a broker’s business model built on high-commission products sold to investors who don’t fully understand the risks.
State registration violations and address falsification
If D.H. Hill’s allegations are accurate, Hawke falsified a client’s address to process an investment while unregistered in the client’s home state. This is extraordinarily serious because: it’s deliberate document fraud; it denies clients their state’s investor protections; it suggests awareness that the transaction shouldn’t proceed; and it demonstrates willingness to violate basic rules for personal gain. Even if you don’t live in a state where your broker lacks registration, this type of allegation should make you question: What else might this person falsify? What other rules might they cut corners on? Can I trust anything they tell me? Integrity violations like alleged document falsification go to the heart of the advisor-client relationship.
What multiple terminations for cause reveal
Being terminated once might be a misunderstanding or personality conflict. Being terminated four times for alleged misconduct reveals a pattern. Hawke was: permitted to resign from J.P. Turner in 2011 for commission and private securities violations; discharged from National Securities in 2019 for private securities violations; discharged from two affiliated entities (Glynn Perryman and National Asset Management) simultaneously in 2019; and discharged from D.H. Hill in 2025 for alleged address falsification. Each time, the termination reason involved alleged rule violations. When multiple firms over many years reach the same conclusion—that a broker violated policies and should be terminated—it’s not coincidence, it’s evidence of a persistent compliance problem.
Researching your advisor before and during the relationship
Don’t make checking BrokerCheck a one-time event before you invest. Set a calendar reminder to review your advisor’s BrokerCheck record quarterly or semi-annually. Disclosures can be added at any time as new complaints are filed, regulatory actions are taken, or terminations occur. You want to know immediately if your advisor receives a customer complaint, gets terminated, or faces regulatory action—not discover it months or years later when you’ve suffered losses. Also check firm-wide disclosure patterns: if your broker works for a firm with extensive complaint histories or regulatory sanctions, understand that supervisory failures at the firm level can enable individual broker misconduct.
About Patil Law, P.C.
Patil Law, P.C. is a securities litigation firm dedicated to representing investors who have suffered losses due to broker misconduct, unsuitable recommendations, and securities fraud. Founded in 2018 by attorney Chetan Patil, the firm focuses exclusively on FINRA arbitration and investment loss recovery.
With over 15 years of combined experience in securities law, Patil Law has successfully recovered more than $25 million for clients across 1,000+ cases. Attorney Chetan Patil earned his law degree from Case Western Reserve University School of Law. Attorneys Gabriela Dubrocq and Patricia Herrera earned their law degrees from University of Miami. The firm handles cases nationwide involving unauthorized trading, churning, unsuitable investments, breach of fiduciary duty, failure to supervise, and investment fraud.
Patil Law works on a contingency fee basis, meaning clients pay no attorney fees unless the firm successfully recovers money on their behalf. All consultations are free and confidential.
Time Limits Apply—Act Now
Securities claims are subject to strict time limits. Under FINRA rules, arbitration claims generally must be filed within six years of the investment or the discovery of wrongdoing.
If you invested with Jason Hawke or another broker with extensive disclosure histories, the clock may already be running on your ability to recover. Don’t let the statute of limitations expire on your claim.
Call: 800-950-6553
Email: info@patillaw.com
Website: investmentlosslawyer.com
We’re here to help you understand your rights and pursue the compensation you deserve. There is no cost and no obligation for an initial consultation.
Disclaimer: The information in this post is based on FINRA BrokerCheck records and public filings. Allegations described are pending or unproven and may be contested. All investors are entitled to fair treatment under securities laws. This is attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This communication is for informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship.