March, 2025 | Based in Watertown, SD
If you’ve experienced financial losses while working with Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan, you may be entitled to compensation. Don’t hesitate to reach out today—call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule your confidential, no-obligation case evaluation.
Key Information About Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan
- Full Name: Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan
- CRD Number: 1172406
- Current Location: Watertown, SD
- Current Status: Not currently registered
- Previous Employers:
- WestPark Capital, Inc. (05/2019 – 06/2022)
- Sandlapper Securities, LLC (08/2011 – 04/2019)
- CapWest Securities, Inc. (09/2005 – 08/2011)
- Disclosure Events: 2 Regulatory Events, 13 Customer Disputes (5 pending, 8 final)
- Recent Regulatory Action: Found to have violated Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) by recommending unsuitable, speculative investments
- Ability to Recover Losses: Eligible investors may recover losses through FINRA arbitration
The Concerning Case of Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan: A Pattern of Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
The securities industry operates on a foundation of trust between financial advisors and their clients. Investment professionals are expected to act in their clients’ best interests, providing suitable recommendations that align with each investor’s financial goals, risk tolerance, and needs. Unfortunately, FINRA records indicate that Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan may have violated this trust with numerous clients.
This article examines the allegations against Vanderlaan, his extensive history of customer disputes, and the options available to investors who may have suffered losses under his guidance.
Detailed Investigation Overview: Recent FINRA Actions and Regulatory Concerns
On January 22, 2025, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) found that Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan willfully violated Rule 15l-1(a)(1) of the Exchange Act (Regulation Best Interest, or “Reg BI”). According to FINRA’s findings, Vanderlaan recommended that two retail customers invest in speculative, unrated corporate bonds that were not in their best interests based on their investment profiles.
The investigation revealed that one of the affected customers was a senior citizen, and both customers had stated investment objectives of growth and income, not speculation. Despite their moderate risk tolerance, Vanderlaan recommended high-risk investments that were unsuitable for their financial needs. For these recommendations, Vanderlaan received approximately $6,508 in commissions.
As a result of these violations, FINRA sanctioned Vanderlaan with:
- A three-month suspension from the securities industry (February 3, 2025 – May 2, 2025)
- A fine of $10,000
- Restitution to affected customers in the amount of $6,508, plus interest
This recent action follows a 2013 regulatory event in which Vanderlaan was fined $1,500 by the South Dakota Department of Labor and Regulation’s Division of Securities for failing to obtain proper approval from his firm before using advertising materials regarding the offer or sale of securities.
Historical Pattern: A Career Marked by Customer Complaints
Vanderlaan’s securities industry career began in 1983, and he has worked for multiple brokerage firms over nearly four decades. His BrokerCheck report reveals a troubling pattern of customer complaints throughout his career:
- Multiple Active Complaints: Currently, Vanderlaan faces five pending customer disputes, all filed in 2023, related to GWG L-Bonds—a product that has been the subject of significant regulatory scrutiny.
- Previous Settled Disputes: Vanderlaan’s record shows two settlements with customers:
- A $50,000 settlement in 2013 involving allegations of wrongful conduct, breach of fiduciary duty, and violations related to unauthorized trading in oil and gas securities and real estate investments
- A $25,000 settlement in 2014 concerning alleged fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence involving non-traded REITs
- Additional Closed Complaints: Six other customer disputes were closed without action or denied, but the pattern of allegations—including unsuitability, misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty—mirrors those found in the settled and pending cases.
This extensive history of customer complaints is unusual and raises serious concerns about Vanderlaan’s investment practices and recommendations over time.
The GWG L-Bond Controversy: Understanding the Current Allegations
The five pending customer complaints against Vanderlaan all involve GWG L-Bonds, with alleged damages totaling over $600,000. These bonds, issued by GWG Holdings, were high-yield debt instruments used to finance the purchase of life insurance policies on the secondary market.
In April 2022, GWG Holdings filed for bankruptcy, leaving many investors facing significant losses. The pending complaints against Vanderlaan allege various violations in connection with these investments, including:
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Failing to act in clients’ best interests
- Negligence: Failing to exercise reasonable care in making recommendations
- Misrepresentation: Providing misleading information about the risks and nature of the investments
- Unsuitability: Recommending investments inappropriate for clients’ risk tolerance and investment objectives
- Violation of Regulation Best Interest: Failing to place clients’ interests ahead of his own compensation interests
The concentration of these complaints around a single product raises questions about whether Vanderlaan fully understood or properly communicated the risks associated with GWG L-Bonds to his clients.
Red Flags for Investors: How to Identify Potential Misconduct
The Vanderlaan case highlights several warning signs that investors should watch for when working with any financial advisor:
1. Recommendations That Don’t Match Your Risk Profile
Vanderlaan’s recent FINRA sanction specifically cited his recommendations of speculative investments to clients with moderate risk tolerance. This is a common form of misconduct known as “unsuitability.”
Warning Sign: An advisor pushing investments that seem more volatile or risky than you’re comfortable with, or than what you’ve indicated in your investment profile.
2. Concentration in High-Commission Products
The pending GWG L-Bond complaints against Vanderlaan involve products that typically offered higher-than-average commissions to brokers. This can create a conflict of interest.
Warning Sign: Recommendations heavily concentrated in complex, illiquid products like non-traded REITs, private placements, or structured products, especially if they’re presented as “no risk” opportunities.
3. Inadequate Risk Disclosures
FINRA’s findings in the 2025 action suggest Vanderlaan may not have adequately disclosed the risks of the speculative bonds he recommended.
Warning Sign: Receiving minimal written information about recommended investments, or verbal assurances that downplay risks documented in written materials.
4. Multiple Regulatory Disclosures
Vanderlaan’s history includes multiple regulatory events and customer complaints over many years.
Warning Sign: Before working with any financial advisor, check their FINRA BrokerCheck record for a pattern of customer complaints or regulatory actions.
5. Frequent Firm Changes
Vanderlaan changed firms multiple times during his career. While sometimes legitimate, frequent job changes can also indicate regulatory issues or termination for misconduct.
Warning Sign: An advisor who has worked at numerous firms over a relatively short period, particularly if those firms have regulatory problems themselves.
Legal and Regulatory Framework: Understanding Advisor Obligations
Financial advisors like Vanderlaan are subject to numerous regulations designed to protect investors:
Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI)
Implemented in 2020, Reg BI elevated the standard of conduct for broker-dealers and their representatives. Under this rule, financial professionals must:
- Act in the retail customer’s best interest
- Exercise reasonable diligence, care, and skill
- Disclose all material facts, including conflicts of interest
- Establish and enforce policies to identify and address conflicts of interest
Vanderlaan’s 2025 FINRA sanction specifically cited violations of this regulation.
FINRA Rule 2111: Suitability
Although Reg BI has superseded parts of this rule, the suitability obligation remains fundamental. It requires that advisors have a reasonable basis to believe their recommendations are suitable based on a client’s:
- Investment profile
- Financial situation
- Tax status
- Investment objectives
- Risk tolerance
FINRA Rule 2010: Standards of Commercial Honor
This foundational rule requires brokers to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. It serves as a catch-all provision for various forms of misconduct.
State Securities Laws
In addition to federal regulations, each state has its own securities laws. Vanderlaan was previously sanctioned by South Dakota regulators for violations of state requirements.
Guidance for Affected Investors: Steps to Take If You Worked with Vanderlaan
If you were a client of Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan and are concerned about your investments, especially GWG L-Bonds or other alternative investments, consider taking these steps:
1. Review Your Account Statements and Investment Documents
Carefully examine all documentation related to your investments, including:
- Initial investment agreements and subscription documents
- Account statements showing purchases and performance
- Marketing materials or presentations you received
- Communications with Vanderlaan about your investments
2. Assess Whether Investments Matched Your Risk Profile
Consider whether the investments recommended to you were consistent with:
- Your stated investment objectives
- Your risk tolerance
- Your financial situation and needs
- The representations made to you about the investments
3. Document Your Understanding of the Investments
Make notes about what you were told regarding:
- Expected returns and potential risks
- Liquidity of the investments
- Fees and commissions
- The nature of the investment strategy
4. Understand the Statute of Limitations
For FINRA arbitration claims:
- Generally, claims must be filed within six years of the event giving rise to the dispute
- For many GWG L-Bond investors, this clock started when GWG Holdings filed for bankruptcy in April 2022
- Don’t delay in seeking legal advice, as waiting could jeopardize your ability to recover losses
5. Consult with a Specialized Securities Attorney
An experienced investment fraud attorney can:
- Evaluate the strength of your potential claim
- Determine if your investments were unsuitable
- Calculate your recoverable damages
- Guide you through the FINRA arbitration process
How Our Investment Fraud Attorneys Can Help
Our law firm specializes in representing investors who have suffered losses due to broker misconduct. For cases like the Vanderlaan matter, we offer comprehensive legal services designed to help you recover your losses.
Expert Analysis of Your Investment Losses
Our team conducts a detailed analysis of your account to:
- Identify unsuitable investment recommendations
- Calculate your actual financial losses
- Document violations of securities regulations
- Develop a strong legal strategy for recovery
FINRA Arbitration Representation
Most investment disputes are resolved through FINRA arbitration rather than court proceedings. Our attorneys have extensive experience in:
- Filing properly documented claims
- Navigating the discovery process
- Representing clients at pre-hearing conferences
- Preparing compelling arguments for arbitration hearings
- Negotiating favorable settlements when appropriate
Contingency Fee Structure
We understand that you’ve already suffered financial loss, which is why we handle investment fraud cases on a contingency fee basis:
- No upfront legal fees
- No fees unless we recover money for you
- Fees based on a percentage of your recovery
Specialized Knowledge of Complex Investments
Our attorneys have specific experience with the types of investments at issue in the Vanderlaan case:
- GWG L-Bonds and other life settlement-backed securities
- Non-traded REITs and other alternative investments
- High-yield corporate bonds
- Private placements and other illiquid investments
The Importance of Taking Action Now
If you’ve suffered losses while working with Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan, it’s important not to delay in seeking legal advice. The five pending FINRA arbitrations against Vanderlaan suggest that other investors are already taking steps to recover their losses, particularly related to GWG L-Bonds.
As more claims are filed and more information comes to light about potential misconduct, the chance of full recovery can diminish. Additionally, firms may attempt to shield themselves from liability, and the statute of limitations continues to run.
Our experienced investment fraud attorneys can help you understand your rights and the potential for recovery in your specific situation. With our guidance, you can make informed decisions about pursuing compensation for your losses.
Don’t wait to explore your recovery options. If you’ve invested with Alfred Sietze Vanderlaan and experienced losses, especially in GWG L-Bonds or other alternative investments, contact us today. Call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule your free, confidential consultation with a knowledgeable investment fraud attorney.
