Francisco (Frank) Gomez: Texas Broker Resigns from LPL Financial After Undisclosed Loans and Annuity Sales Allegations

Fate, TX | January 13, 2026

Texas financial advisor Francisco M. Gomez (CRD# 6289883) was permitted to resign from LPL Financial on November 5, 2025, following allegations that he failed to disclose and receive approval for loans from a customer, engaged in unapproved outside business activities, and used unauthorized messaging platforms for business communications. According to FINRA BrokerCheck records, Gomez also faces a pending written customer complaint seeking $395,869.90 in damages, alleging he sold annuities in 2020 without disclosing all material terms.

The customer complaint—filed on September 15, 2025—states that “client also provided loans below market rates to entities allegedly affiliated with advisor,” suggesting a troubling pattern of undisclosed financial relationships between Gomez and his clients. This type of conduct raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest, breach of fiduciary duty, and potential financial exploitation of clients.

As of December 2025, Gomez is no longer registered with FINRA and cannot legally sell securities or provide investment advice in a registered capacity. The combination of the termination and pending complaint—both involving similar issues around disclosure failures and inappropriate financial relationships—suggests compliance violations serious enough to end his career in the securities industry.

BrokerCheck Snapshot

Name: Francisco (Frank) Gomez
CRD #: 6289883
Previous Firm: LPL Financial LLC (April 2021 – December 2025) – PERMITTED TO RESIGN
Location: Fate, TX
Years in Industry: 9
Number of Disclosures: 2 (1 Pending Customer Dispute, 1 Termination)
Current Status: Not currently registered

The Termination: Multiple Compliance Violations

LPL Financial permitted Gomez to resign on November 5, 2025, following an internal investigation that uncovered multiple serious compliance failures:

Termination Type: Permitted to Resign
Termination Date: November 5, 2025
Employer: LPL Financial LLC

The Allegations

According to the termination disclosure, Gomez:

1. Failed to disclose and receive prior approval for loans from customer – Borrowing money from clients without firm knowledge or approval
2. Failed to disclose and receive prior approval for outside business activities – Operating business ventures without required disclosure and firm authorization
3. Used an unapproved messaging platform to transmit business-related communications – Conducting business on unauthorized platforms, potentially to avoid firm supervision and record-keeping requirements

Why “Permitted to Resign” Matters

The designation “permitted to resign” rather than “discharged” or “terminated” is significant:

What It Typically Means:

• The firm’s investigation uncovered violations serious enough to warrant separation
• Rather than formally discharge the broker, the firm allowed resignation
• Often negotiated as a way to resolve matters without prolonged proceedings
• The broker avoids the stigma of “discharged” but the disclosure remains permanent

Why Firms Use This Approach:

• Faster resolution than formal termination proceedings
• Reduces potential litigation risk
• Allows broker to leave with slightly less severe designation
• Still triggers mandatory FINRA disclosure requirements

Make no mistake: being “permitted to resign” after allegations is fundamentally a termination. The broker is leaving involuntarily because of serious misconduct. The semantic difference doesn’t change the gravity of the underlying conduct.

The Customer Complaint: $395,869 in Alleged Damages

Just six weeks before his permitted resignation, Gomez received a written customer complaint alleging serious violations:

Date Received: September 15, 2025
Product Type: Annuity
Alleged Damages: $395,869.90
Status: Pending

The Allegations in the Customer Complaint

The complaint alleges two distinct but related problems:

1. Sold annuities in 2020 without disclosing all material terms – Misrepresentation or omission of important information about annuity features, fees, surrender charges, or other critical terms 
2. Client provided loans below market rates to entities allegedly affiliated with advisor – The customer made loans at favorable interest rates to businesses connected to Gomez 

The Connection: Loans and Undisclosed Relationships

The most troubling aspect of this case is the apparent connection between the customer complaint and the termination allegations. Both involve:

• Loans from clients – The customer complaint mentions “loans below market rates to entities allegedly affiliated with advisor”
• Lack of disclosure – The termination cites “failed to disclose and receive prior approval for loans from customer”
• Undisclosed business activities – The termination cites “failed to disclose and receive prior approval for outside business activities”

This suggests a scenario where:

1. Gomez sold annuities to a client in 2020
2. The client then provided loans to businesses affiliated with Gomez
3. These loans were at below-market interest rates (favorable to Gomez’s businesses)
4. Neither the annuity sales disclosures nor the loan arrangements were properly disclosed to LPL Financial
5. The client later discovered problems and filed a complaint
6. LPL Financial’s investigation uncovered the undisclosed loans and outside business activities
7. Gomez was permitted to resign rather than face termination

Understanding the Prohibited Practice: Borrowing from Clients

Borrowing money from clients is one of the most serious compliance violations in the securities industry. It creates fundamental conflicts of interest and exploitation risks.

Why Broker-Client Loans Are Prohibited

1. Conflicts of Interest When a broker borrows money from a client, the broker has a personal financial interest in:

• Maintaining the relationship at all costs
• Recommending investments that keep the client liquid enough to service the loan
• Avoiding recommendations that might upset the client or cause them to demand repayment

2. Undue Influence and Pressure Brokers hold positions of trust and authority. When they request loans from clients:

• Clients may feel pressured to agree
• The power dynamic is inherently unequal
• Clients may fear that refusing will result in poor service or loss of the relationship
• Elder financial abuse concerns are heightened when clients are elderly or vulnerable

3. Risk of Exploitation “Below market rate” loans mean:

• The client is not receiving fair compensation for the risk they’re taking
• The broker is profiting at the client’s expense
• The arrangement essentially transfers wealth from client to broker
• If the broker defaults, the client may have difficulty recovering funds

4. Undermines Supervision When loans aren’t disclosed to the firm:

• The firm cannot monitor for conflicts of interest
• Supervision systems are bypassed
• Other compliance violations may be hidden
• The firm cannot protect clients from exploitation

FINRA’s Strict Rules on Borrowing

FINRA Rule 3240 strictly prohibits registered representatives from borrowing money from or lending money to customers unless:

Permitted Exceptions:

1. The customer is an immediate family member
2. The customer is a financial institution in the business of lending
3. The customer and broker are both registered persons of the same firm
4. The customer and broker have a personal relationship outside the broker-customer relationship
5. The customer and broker have a business relationship outside the broker-customer relationship

Even When Exceptions Apply:

• Firm approval is required – The broker must disclose and receive written permission
• Documentation is mandatory – Terms must be in writing
• Ongoing monitoring – The firm must supervise the arrangement

Gomez’s alleged failure to disclose and obtain approval means even if an exception technically applied, he violated FINRA rules by keeping the loans secret from his firm.

The Annuity Disclosure Failures

The customer complaint alleges Gomez “sold annuities in 2020 without disclosing all material terms.” This raises serious suitability and disclosure concerns.

What “Material Terms” Must Be Disclosed

When selling annuities, brokers must disclose:

1. Fees and Charges

• Surrender charges and schedules
• Mortality and expense risk charges
• Administrative fees
• Investment management fees
• Rider charges

2. Liquidity Restrictions

• Surrender charge periods (often 7-10+ years)
• Penalties for early withdrawal
• Free withdrawal provisions
• Market value adjustment provisions

3. Tax Consequences

• Tax-deferred growth
• Ordinary income tax on withdrawals
• Potential penalties for early withdrawal before age 59½
• Impact on estate planning

4. Investment Risks

• Market risk in variable annuities
• Credit risk of insurance company
• Inflation risk in fixed annuities
• Opportunity costs

5. Alternative Products

• Whether other investments might better meet client needs
• Comparison of costs and benefits

6. Conflicts of Interest

• Commission compensation
• Any additional benefits to the broker
• Undisclosed financial relationships like loans from the client

The Loan Connection to Annuity Sales

The most troubling possibility is that the loan arrangements influenced the annuity recommendations:

Scenario 1: Loan as Quid Pro Quo

• Gomez recommended annuities to generate commissions
• In exchange, he obtained favorable loans from the client
• The loans were essentially kickbacks for the business

Scenario 2: Loans Created Conflict

• Client provided loans to Gomez’s businesses
• Gomez later recommended annuities
• The existing financial relationship created undisclosed conflicts

Scenario 3: Annuity Proceeds Funded Loans

• Client purchased annuities
• Proceeds or liquidity from account were used to fund loans
• The investments were a vehicle to generate funds for the loans

Any of these scenarios would constitute serious violations of broker-dealer duties and fiduciary obligations.

Outside Business Activities: The Hidden Entities

The termination also cites Gomez’s failure to disclose and receive approval for “outside business activities.” His Form U4 lists several business entities:

Disclosed Business Activities

1. Diligent Hands Wealth Management, LLC

• DBA for LPL business (entity for LPL business)
• Investment related
• Located in Fate, TX
• Started April 2021

2. K6 Investment Group LLC dba Keslee Blalock Entertainment

• Business Owner / Managing member
• Non-investment related
• Located in Fate, TX
• Started April 2021
• Note: Listed as “0%” involvement, raising questions about accuracy

The Problem: Undisclosed Activities

The termination states Gomez “failed to disclose and receive prior approval for outside business activities,” which means:

• He operated businesses or engaged in activities not reported to LPL
• These activities were likely the entities that received the client loans
• The client was making “loans below market rates to entities allegedly affiliated with advisor”
• These were the hidden business interests creating conflicts of interest

Why Outside Business Disclosure Matters

FINRA Rule 3270 requires registered representatives to provide written notice to their firm before engaging in any business activity outside the scope of their employment, including:

• Operating a business
• Serving as an officer, director, or employee
• Receiving compensation from outside activities

The Purpose:

• Allows firms to identify potential conflicts of interest
• Enables monitoring for time commitment issues
• Permits supervision of customer interactions outside the firm
• Prevents fraud and exploitation schemes

When brokers hide outside business activities—especially those involving client loans or investments—it’s often because:

• The activities create obvious conflicts they know the firm would prohibit
• They’re operating schemes that wouldn’t survive compliance scrutiny
• They’re receiving undisclosed compensation from clients

Unapproved Messaging Platforms: Avoiding Supervision

The third violation cited in Gomez’s termination was using “an unapproved messaging platform to transmit business-related communications.”

Why This Matters

Record-Keeping Requirements: All broker-dealer communications with clients must be:

• Conducted on approved platforms
• Captured and archived
• Available for firm review and regulatory examination
• Preserved for required retention periods

Common Unapproved Platforms:

• Personal email accounts
• WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram
• Personal text messages (SMS)
• Facebook Messenger, Instagram DMs
• Any platform not monitored by the firm

Why Brokers Use Unapproved Platforms

Brokers typically use unapproved messaging platforms to:

1. Hide misconduct – Avoid creating records of improper communications
2. Evade supervision – Conduct business outside firm monitoring
3. Maintain undisclosed relationships – Communicate about loans, outside businesses, or personal arrangements
4. Avoid compliance flags – Discuss recommendations that might trigger firm review

In Gomez’s case, using unapproved messaging platforms likely allowed him to:

• Discuss loan arrangements with clients off the books
• Coordinate outside business activities without firm knowledge
• Make annuity recommendations without proper documentation
• Avoid the paper trail that would have revealed his compliance violations

Francisco Gomez’s Career Background

According to FINRA records, Francisco Gomez had a relatively short career in the securities industry, primarily in Texas:

Career History:

• LPL Financial LLC (April 2021 – December 2025) – Registered Representative in Fate, TX – PERMITTED TO RESIGN
• BBVA Securities Inc. (June 2016 – April 2021) – Retail Relationship Manager in Mesquite, TX
• Compass Bank (June 2011 – April 2021) – Employee in Birmingham, AL
• BBVA Compass Insurance Agency, Inc. (March 2013 – April 2021) – Agent in Austin, TX

Other Employment:

• Uber Eats (September 2018 – May 2020) – Driver
• Lyft (September 2018 – December 2019) – Driver

Securities Licenses:

• Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Representative (Series 6) – passed June 2016
• Securities Industry Essentials (SIE) – passed October 2018
• Uniform Securities Agent State Law (Series 63) – passed September 2017

Gomez holds only a Series 6 license, which is limited to mutual funds and variable products like variable annuities—consistent with the annuity sales allegations in the customer complaint.

The Timeline: From Annuity Sales to Resignation

2020: Allegedly sold annuities to client without full disclosure of material terms
2020-2025: Client provided below-market-rate loans to entities affiliated with Gomez
April 2021: Gomez joined LPL Financial
September 15, 2025: Customer complaint filed alleging annuity misrepresentation and undisclosed loans
November 5, 2025: Gomez permitted to resign following LPL investigation
December 2025: Registration terminated; Gomez no longer registered with FINRA

The fact that the annuity sales allegedly occurred in 2020—before Gomez joined LPL in April 2021—raises important questions:

1. Did the conduct occur at BBVA Securities? If so, why wasn’t it disclosed when he moved to LPL?
2. Were the loans ongoing during his LPL employment? This would explain why LPL terminated him for failing to disclose them.
3. Did he transfer the client to LPL? The client may have followed him from BBVA to LPL, with the undisclosed loan relationship continuing.

Red Flags: Financial Relationships with Advisors

The allegations against Gomez highlight warning signs that all investors should recognize:

1. Requests for Personal Loans

Never lend money to your financial advisor. Regardless of the explanation or the terms offered:

• It creates conflicts of interest
• It undermines objective advice
• It may violate securities regulations
• It puts your investment relationship at risk

2. Investment in Advisor’s Outside Businesses

Be extremely cautious about:

• Investing in your advisor’s personal ventures
• Providing capital to businesses owned or managed by your advisor
• “Opportunity” investments in entities affiliated with your advisor
• Below-market loans to help your advisor with business ventures

3. Incomplete Annuity Disclosures

Warning signs of inadequate annuity disclosure:

• Advisor rushes through paperwork
• Surrender charges aren’t clearly explained
• You’re not given time to review illustrations and prospectuses
• Benefits are emphasized but costs and restrictions are minimized
• Advisor discourages you from seeking second opinions

4. Off-the-Books Communications

Be concerned if your advisor:

• Insists on using personal email or text messages
• Uses WhatsApp, Signal, or other encrypted messaging apps
• Discourages you from calling their office number
• Wants to keep certain discussions “between us”
• Avoids putting things in writing through official channels

5. Pressure or Urgency

Financial exploitation often involves:

• Pressure to act quickly
• Emphasis on the personal relationship
• Appeals to friendship or trust
• Requests for favors that blur professional boundaries
• Suggestions that arrangements should be kept confidential

Can You Recover Losses from Annuity Fraud and Undisclosed Conflicts?

If you purchased variable annuities or other investments based on incomplete disclosures, misrepresentations, or from an advisor with undisclosed conflicts of interest—including personal financial relationships—you may be entitled to recover your losses through FINRA arbitration.

Violations involving annuity sales and undisclosed relationships may include:

• Unsuitable investment recommendations
• Material misrepresentations and omissions
• Breach of fiduciary duty
• Failure to disclose conflicts of interest
• Elder financial abuse (if the client is elderly)
• Failure to supervise by the brokerage firm

Patil Law, P.C. represents investors nationwide who have been harmed by broker misconduct, unsuitable annuity sales, and undisclosed conflicts of interest. We have over 15 years of experience in securities law and have recovered more than $25 million for clients across 1,000+ cases.

About 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.

Why FINRA Arbitration Is Effective for These Cases

Cases involving undisclosed conflicts and improper loans are particularly well-suited to FINRA arbitration because:

• Documentation exists – Loan agreements, business records, and communications provide evidence
• Violations are clear – FINRA rules explicitly prohibit undisclosed borrowing
• Firm liability – Brokerage firms can be held responsible for failure to supervise
• Pattern evidence – Termination for the same conduct strengthens the case
• Punitive damages – Egregious conduct involving personal financial relationships may warrant punitive awards

Our Experience with Annuity Fraud and Conflict of Interest Cases

Cases involving variable annuity fraud, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and prohibited financial relationships require attorneys who understand both the legal standards and the sophisticated schemes brokers use to exploit clients. Attorney Chetan Patil and our legal team—including attorneys Gabriela Dubrocq and Patricia Herrera—focus exclusively on investor protection and securities law.

We handle cases involving:

• Variable annuity fraud and misrepresentation
• Unsuitable investment recommendations
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Prohibited borrowing from clients
• Breach of fiduciary duty
• Elder financial abuse
• Material misrepresentations and omissions
• Failure to supervise

We work on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no attorney fees unless we recover money for you. Your consultation is completely free and confidential.

Time Limits Apply

Securities claims must generally be filed within six years under FINRA rules. If you invested with Francisco Gomez at LPL Financial or BBVA Securities, particularly if you:

• Purchased annuities in 2020 or later
• Provided loans to Gomez or his business entities
• Had financial relationships outside the normal broker-client arrangement
• Experienced losses or believe you received incomplete disclosures

Time may be running out to protect your rights. The six-year limitation period may run from the date of the investment, when you discovered the problem, or when you should have discovered it with reasonable diligence.

Related Brokers and Firms

If you’ve had concerns with advisors at similar firms or experienced comparable issues, you may want to review:

• LPL Financial Advisors – Complaints & Disclosures
• Variable Annuity Fraud
• Unsuitable Investment Claims
• Broker Misconduct
• Elder Financial Abuse
• Failure to Supervise

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the allegations against Francisco Gomez?

Francisco Gomez was permitted to resign from LPL Financial in November 2025 following allegations that he failed to disclose and receive approval for loans from a customer, engaged in unapproved outside business activities, and used unauthorized messaging platforms. He also faces a pending customer complaint seeking $395,869.90, alleging he sold annuities in 2020 without disclosing all material terms and that the client provided below-market-rate loans to entities affiliated with Gomez.

Can investors recover losses from annuity fraud?

Yes. Investors who purchased variable annuities or other investments based on incomplete disclosures, misrepresentations, or from advisors with undisclosed conflicts of interest may be entitled to recover their losses through FINRA arbitration. Undisclosed financial relationships like loans from clients create serious conflicts that can invalidate investment recommendations.

What is 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, and claims generally must be filed within six years of the incident.

What does “unsuitable investment” mean?

An unsuitable investment is one that doesn’t align with an investor’s financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, or liquidity needs. Variable annuities with high fees and long surrender periods are particularly prone to suitability issues, especially when sold with inadequate disclosure or by advisors with undisclosed conflicts of interest.

How do I look up a broker on BrokerCheck?

Visit FINRA’s BrokerCheck website at brokercheck.finra.org and search by the broker’s name or CRD number. BrokerCheck provides free access to employment history, registrations, qualifications, and disclosure events including customer complaints, regulatory actions, and employment terminations.

What should I do if I suspect broker misconduct?

First, gather all documentation related to your investments, including annuity contracts, account statements, loan agreements (if any), and communications with your broker. File a written complaint with your brokerage firm’s compliance department. Then, consult with a securities attorney who can evaluate whether you have grounds for a FINRA arbitration claim. Time limits apply, so don’t delay seeking legal guidance.

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, and failure to supervise.

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.

Contact Patil Law Today

If you purchased annuities, provided loans to your financial advisor, or experienced other issues with Francisco Gomez or any other financial advisor, contact us today for a free, confidential consultation.

Call: 800-950-6553
Email: info@patillaw.com
Website: investmentlosslawyer.com

There is no cost and no obligation. We’re here to help.

Disclaimer: The information in this article is based on FINRA BrokerCheck records and public filings. The customer complaint described is pending and involves unproven allegations. The employment separation followed internal allegations as reported by the firm. 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.