March, 2025 | Based in Lake Oswego, OR
Worried about potential investment fraud? Take the first step to protect your financial future today. Call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule your no-obligation case evaluation with our experienced securities fraud attorneys.
Critical Details About Gwendolyn J. Hayes
- Full Name: Gwendolyn Janice Hayes
- CRD Number: 5125590
- Current Status: Not currently registered (Permanently barred by FINRA)
- Last Known Location: Lake Oswego, Oregon
- Former Employers: Ameriprise Financial Services (May-August 2024), Edward Jones (March 2010-May 2024)
- Registration Status: Permanently barred from the securities industry as of January 17, 2025
- FINRA Disclosures: 1 Regulatory Event, 1 Employment Termination
- Industry Experience: Entered the industry in 2010
- State Licenses: Previously licensed but currently revoked
- Examination History: Passed Series 7, SIE, and Series 66 exams
- Ability to Recover Losses: Investors who suffered losses may have recourse through FINRA arbitration
Case Overview: Serious Allegations Against Gwendolyn Hayes
Gwendolyn Janice Hayes, formerly registered with Edward Jones in Tualatin, Oregon and briefly with Ameriprise Financial Services in Lake Oswego, Oregon, is currently under investigation for multiple serious violations of securities regulations. According to FINRA records, Hayes has been permanently barred from the securities industry as of January 17, 2025, following her refusal to cooperate with a FINRA investigation.
The investigation centered around three critical allegations:
- Changing customers’ investment objectives without their consent
- Mismarking transactions as unsolicited when they were actually solicited
- Accepting trading instructions from unauthorized individuals
These allegations represent fundamental breaches of fiduciary duty and securities regulations. When financial advisors change investment objectives without client consent, they may be engaging in a form of fraud that enables them to recommend unsuitable investments that generate higher commissions but expose clients to inappropriate levels of risk.
Similarly, mismarking transactions as “unsolicited” (claiming the client initiated the trade) when they were actually “solicited” (recommended by the advisor) can be a tactic to evade supervision and compliance requirements. This misrepresentation can shield problematic trading patterns from detection and allows advisors to circumvent firm policies designed to protect investors.
Perhaps most concerning is the allegation that Hayes accepted trading instructions from unauthorized individuals. This practice violates basic security protocols and can lead to unauthorized transactions, identity theft, and significant financial losses for affected clients.
The Regulatory Action and Its Implications
The FINRA BrokerCheck report reveals a troubling sequence of events:
- April 5, 2024: Hayes was discharged from Edward Jones due to “concerns [that the] registered representative did not adhere to the Firm’s policies relating to Fictitious or Misleading Account or System Information and Advisory Annual Review Requirement.” This suggests Hayes may have been falsifying account information or failing to conduct required client reviews.
- May 2024: Hayes briefly joined Ameriprise Financial Services but left in August 2024, after just three months.
- January 17, 2025: FINRA permanently barred Hayes from the securities industry after she “refused to produce information requested by FINRA in connection with its examination into whether she changed customers’ investment objectives without their consent, mismarked transactions as unsolicited, and accepted trading instructions from unauthorized individuals.”
FINRA’s permanent bar—the most severe sanction available to the regulator—is particularly significant. When registered representatives refuse to cooperate with FINRA investigations, they are typically barred permanently from the industry. This non-cooperation often suggests the individual fears that the evidence would confirm serious misconduct.
Red Flags for Investors: Understanding the Warning Signs
Hayes’ case highlights several critical red flags that investors should be vigilant about when working with any financial advisor:
1. Unauthorized Changes to Investment Profiles
Investment objectives are the cornerstone of a suitable investment strategy. These objectives define your risk tolerance, time horizon, and financial goals. When an advisor changes these without your explicit consent, they may be:
- Attempting to justify unsuitable recommendations
- Trying to sell higher-commission products that don’t match your actual needs
- Setting up a defense against future claims of unsuitability
- Manipulating performance metrics to make their strategies appear more appropriate
Investors should regularly review their account statements and investment profile information to ensure they accurately reflect their actual investment objectives.
2. Solicited vs. Unsolicited Transactions
Financial advisors must accurately mark trades as either “solicited” (recommended by the advisor) or “unsolicited” (requested by the client). Mismarking trades as unsolicited when they were actually recommended by the advisor can:
- Help the advisor evade heightened supervisory requirements for solicited trades
- Create a false record that shields the advisor from responsibility for poor recommendations
- Allow the advisor to execute transactions that might otherwise be flagged as unsuitable
- Establish a paper trail that makes it harder for clients to recover losses from unsuitable investments
3. Unauthorized Trading Activities
Accepting trading instructions from unauthorized individuals represents a severe breach of trust and security protocols. This practice can lead to:
- Unauthorized transactions in your account
- Potential identity theft issues
- Circumvention of proper authority and documentation
- Conflicts of interest if the unauthorized individuals have relationships with the advisor
4. Refusal to Cooperate with Regulators
Perhaps the most significant red flag in Hayes’ case is her refusal to cooperate with FINRA’s investigation. When a financial professional refuses to provide information to regulators:
- It often suggests they believe the evidence would confirm serious misconduct
- It demonstrates a disregard for regulatory oversight designed to protect investors
- It indicates a failure to uphold the transparency and accountability expected of financial professionals
- It typically results in a permanent bar from the industry, which prevents future misconduct
Legal Framework: Rules and Regulations at Issue
Several FINRA rules and securities regulations are directly relevant to the allegations against Hayes:
FINRA Rule 2090: Know Your Customer
This rule requires brokers to use “reasonable diligence” to learn the essential facts concerning every customer. Changing investment objectives without client consent directly violates this fundamental obligation.
FINRA Rule 2111: Suitability
This rule requires that recommendations to clients be suitable based on the client’s actual investment profile. By allegedly changing investment objectives without consent, Hayes may have been attempting to make unsuitable investments appear suitable on paper.
FINRA Rule 4511: Books and Records Requirements
This rule requires member firms and associated persons to make and preserve accurate books and records. Mismarking transactions as unsolicited and falsifying account information directly violates these requirements.
FINRA Rule 8210: Provision of Information and Testimony
This rule authorizes FINRA to require persons associated with a member firm to provide information related to an investigation. Hayes’ refusal to provide requested information violated this rule and resulted in her permanent bar from the industry.
FINRA Rule 2010: Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade
This foundational rule requires brokers to “observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.” The alleged misconduct—changing investment objectives without consent, mismarking transactions, and accepting unauthorized instructions—would violate this ethical standard.
Guidance for Affected Investors: Steps to Take Now
If you were a client of Gwendolyn Hayes at either Edward Jones or Ameriprise Financial Services, there are several crucial steps you should consider taking to protect your interests:
1. Review Your Account Documents
Carefully examine all account documents, including:
- Account opening paperwork
- Investment policy statements
- Risk tolerance questionnaires
- Transaction confirmations
- Account statements
Look specifically for any changes to your investment objectives, risk tolerance, or other profile information that you did not authorize.
2. Identify Unauthorized Transactions
Review all transactions in your account and identify any that:
- You did not authorize
- Were characterized as “unsolicited” but were actually recommended by Hayes
- Were executed based on instructions from someone other than yourself or your authorized representatives
3. Calculate Potential Damages
If you identify unauthorized changes to your investment profile or unauthorized transactions, attempt to quantify the financial impact:
- Compare the performance of your actual investments to what would have been suitable based on your true investment objectives
- Calculate losses from specific unauthorized transactions
- Document additional fees or costs incurred as a result of inappropriate advice or actions
4. Preserve All Communication Records
Gather and preserve all communications with Hayes or her firms, including:
- Emails
- Text messages
- Written correspondence
- Notes from in-person or telephone meetings
- Recorded calls (if available)
5. Consider Your Recovery Options
If you have suffered losses, you may have several potential recovery options:
- FINRA arbitration against Edward Jones or Ameriprise
- Complaints to state securities regulators
- Potential civil litigation in appropriate circumstances
Remember that strict time limits apply to securities claims, so seeking prompt legal advice is essential.
How Our Securities Fraud Attorneys Can Help
Our investment fraud attorneys specialize in helping investors recover losses caused by broker misconduct. With the specific issues in the Hayes case, our firm offers:
Comprehensive Forensic Account Analysis
Our team can conduct a detailed forensic analysis of your investment accounts to:
- Identify unauthorized changes to your investment objectives
- Detect transactions that may have been mismarked as unsolicited
- Uncover evidence of unauthorized trading
- Quantify financial damages resulting from the misconduct
Expertise in FINRA Arbitration
The primary venue for resolving disputes with brokers and brokerage firms is FINRA arbitration:
- Our attorneys have extensive experience in this specialized forum
- We understand the specific rules and procedures of FINRA proceedings
- We can effectively present complex evidence about misconduct
- We have a track record of successful outcomes in similar cases
Knowledge of Relevant Securities Regulations
Our legal team possesses deep knowledge of the securities laws and regulations relevant to Hayes’ alleged misconduct:
- FINRA rules governing investment recommendations
- SEC regulations on record-keeping and disclosure
- State securities laws in Oregon and across the country
- Fiduciary duty standards applicable to investment advisors
No Recovery, No Fee Structure
We understand that investors who have suffered losses are concerned about legal costs:
- Our firm works on a contingency fee basis
- You pay nothing unless we recover money for you
- Initial consultations are free and confidential
- We advance all costs associated with your case
Client-Centered Approach
Each investment fraud case is unique, and we provide personalized attention to every client:
- Detailed initial consultation to understand your specific situation
- Regular updates on case progress
- Clear explanations of legal options and strategies
- Thoughtful guidance through the entire recovery process
The Importance of Taking Action
The Hayes case demonstrates how financial advisors can abuse their position of trust to the detriment of their clients. By changing investment objectives without consent, mismarking transactions, and accepting unauthorized instructions, they can create a facade of compliance while engaging in misconduct that puts their interests ahead of their clients’.
When such misconduct occurs, the financial impact on investors can be substantial, particularly for retirees or others relying on their investments for financial security. Unauthorized changes to investment objectives can lead to inappropriate risk exposure, unsuitable investments, and significant losses that might have been avoided with proper advice and documentation.
Moreover, the permanent bar imposed on Hayes means she can never again work in the securities industry, which serves both as a punishment for her misconduct and as protection for future potential victims. However, this regulatory action does not automatically provide compensation to affected clients. Those who suffered losses must take affirmative steps to pursue recovery.
Don’t let misconduct by your financial advisor derail your financial future. If you were a client of Gwendolyn Janice Hayes and suspect that you may have been affected by her alleged misconduct, take action today. Call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule a confidential, no-obligation consultation with our experienced investment fraud attorneys.
