New York, NY | January 15, 2026
Former investment banking professional Harry Harper Warnick (CRD# 6916323) was permanently barred from the securities industry by FINRA in September 2025 after failing to provide information and documents requested during a regulatory investigation. According to FINRA’s findings, Warnick refused to cooperate with an investigation into whether he participated in undisclosed private securities transactions, maintained undisclosed outside business activities, and held an undisclosed securities account.
The permanent bar, which took effect September 15, 2025, means Warnick can never work in any capacity in the securities industry again without special FINRA approval—a sanction reserved for the most serious violations. Just three days before the bar became effective, Warnick was terminated by Spartan Capital Securities, LLC on September 12, 2024, for allegedly conducting outside business activity with a firm client, engaging in private securities transactions without approval, and using his personal email to conceal the activity from supervisors.
Warnick’s refusal to cooperate with both his firm’s internal investigation and FINRA’s regulatory inquiry ultimately led to the industry bar, ending a brief securities career that began in 2018 when he was just beginning his professional life after college.
The FINRA Bar: Career-Ending Consequences of Non-Cooperation
FINRA’s permanent bar is one of the most severe sanctions available to securities regulators, effectively ending a broker’s career. The fact that Warnick received this ultimate penalty for failing to cooperate—rather than for proven substantive misconduct—underscores how seriously regulators treat obstruction of investigations.
What FINRA Found:
Failure to Provide Information: Warnick failed to provide information requested by FINRA during its investigation. This likely included written responses to questions about his activities, explanations of transactions, and sworn testimony.
Failure to Provide Documents: Warnick failed to produce documents FINRA requested, such as emails, text messages, account statements, agreements, or other records related to the alleged undisclosed activities.
Ongoing Investigation Topics: FINRA was investigating whether Warnick:
- Participated in an undisclosed private securities transaction
- Engaged in undisclosed outside business activities (OBA)
- Maintained an undisclosed securities account
Permanent Bar: Without admitting or denying the findings, Warnick consented to a permanent bar from the securities industry in all capacities, effective September 15, 2025.
Why Cooperation is Mandatory:
FINRA Rule 8210 requires brokers and firms to provide information and testimony to FINRA staff investigating potential violations. This obligation exists regardless of whether the broker believes they did anything wrong. Refusing to cooperate is itself a severe violation that typically results in automatic bars from the industry.
The rationale is straightforward: FINRA cannot effectively regulate the securities industry and protect investors if registered individuals can simply refuse to answer questions or provide documents when misconduct is suspected. The cooperation requirement is considered so fundamental that violations typically result in the harshest available sanction—permanent expulsion from the industry.
What “Permanent Bar” Actually Means:
A FINRA bar is effectively a lifetime ban from working in the securities industry. Warnick cannot:
- Work as a registered representative at any broker-dealer
- Serve in any supervisory capacity at a securities firm
- Associate with any FINRA member firm in any capacity
- Perform any investment-related functions for FINRA member firms
The only way to re-enter the industry after a bar is to petition FINRA for readmission, which requires demonstrating rehabilitation and is rarely granted, particularly in cases involving failure to cooperate with investigations.
The Firm’s Termination: Undisclosed Activity and Personal Email Use
Three days before FINRA’s bar became effective, Spartan Capital Securities, LLC terminated Warnick on September 12, 2024. The firm’s termination disclosure reveals the specific conduct that prompted both the internal investigation and FINRA’s regulatory inquiry.
Spartan Capital’s Allegations:
Outside Business Activity with Firm Client: Warnick allegedly conducted outside business activity with a client of the firm—meaning he engaged in business transactions or activities involving a Spartan Capital customer without the firm’s knowledge or approval.
Private Securities Transaction: Warnick allegedly participated in a private securities transaction, commonly called “selling away,” where a registered representative facilitates securities transactions outside their employer firm’s supervision and control.
Undisclosed Securities Account: Warnick allegedly maintained outside securities account activity without disclosing it to or obtaining prior approval from the firm.
Personal Email to Conceal Activity: Perhaps most damning, Warnick allegedly used his personal email address “in order to disguise the transaction from the firm”—suggesting intentional concealment rather than inadvertent failure to disclose.
Failure to Cooperate with Internal Review: Warnick failed to cooperate with Spartan Capital’s internal investigation, foreshadowing his later refusal to cooperate with FINRA.
Product Type: The disclosure indicates “Equity-OTC” (over-the-counter stocks), which often involves smaller, less liquid, and potentially higher-risk securities.
The combination of these allegations paints a picture of deliberate circumvention of supervisory controls, followed by obstruction of both internal and regulatory investigations.
Understanding “Selling Away” and Private Securities Transactions
One of the core allegations against Warnick involves participating in private securities transactions without firm approval—a violation commonly known as “selling away.” This practice poses significant risks to investors and is strictly prohibited by securities regulations.
What Constitutes Selling Away:
Selling away occurs when a registered representative participates in securities transactions outside their employing firm’s regular business. This includes:
Facilitating Purchases: Helping clients buy securities that are not offered through the representative’s employer firm.
Acting as Intermediary: Serving as a middleman between investors and investment opportunities, even if not directly selling the securities.
Receiving Compensation: Taking compensation (commissions, fees, finder’s fees) related to securities transactions conducted outside the firm.
Promising Returns: Making representations or promises about investment opportunities not supervised by the firm.
Why Selling Away is Prohibited:
Loss of Supervision: When transactions occur outside the firm, the firm’s compliance and supervisory systems cannot review them for suitability, proper disclosure, or adherence to securities laws.
Investor Protection Gaps: Investors may believe they have the protection of the firm’s capital, insurance, and regulatory oversight when in reality the transaction is completely separate.
Fraud Risk: Selling away is frequently associated with fraudulent schemes, Ponzi schemes, and unsuitable investments because the transactions occur beyond regulatory scrutiny.
Conflicts of Interest: Representatives may have personal financial interests in outside opportunities that conflict with their duty to serve clients’ best interests.
Lack of Due Diligence: Firms conduct due diligence on products they offer; outside transactions bypass this important investor protection.
FINRA Rule 3280 requires registered representatives to provide written notice to their firms before participating in any private securities transaction. Firms must either approve, disapprove, or acknowledge the transaction. Engaging in private securities transactions without this approval violates FINRA rules and can result in sanctions including bars from the industry.
Undisclosed Outside Business Activities: The OBA Violation
Beyond the private securities transaction allegations, Warnick was also investigated for undisclosed outside business activities (OBA). While related to selling away, OBA violations can encompass a broader range of conduct.
What Qualifies as Outside Business Activity:
FINRA Rule 3270 requires registered representatives to provide written notice to their firms about any business activities outside their employment with the firm. This includes:
Employment: Working for another company, even part-time or on weekends.
Self-Employment: Operating a business as a sole proprietor, partner, or corporate officer.
Passive Investments: Even passive activities may require disclosure if they involve active participation in business operations.
Investment-Related Activities: Consulting, advising, or providing services related to securities or investments.
Compensation: Activities for which the representative receives any form of compensation.
Why OBA Disclosure Matters:
Firms need to know about outside activities to assess:
Time Commitment: Whether outside activities interfere with the representative’s duties to firm clients.
Conflicts of Interest: Whether outside activities create conflicts with the firm’s business or clients’ interests.
Regulatory Compliance: Whether outside activities violate securities regulations or create liability for the firm.
Reputational Risk: Whether outside activities could damage the firm’s reputation if they become problematic.
The requirement to disclose OBA exists even if the activity is completely legitimate and non-investment related. Representatives who fail to disclose face sanctions including fines, suspensions, and in cases involving deliberate concealment or refusal to cooperate with investigations, permanent bars.
The Personal Email Red Flag: Intentional Concealment
One of the most troubling aspects of Spartan Capital’s termination disclosure is the allegation that Warnick “used his personal email address in order to disguise the transaction from the firm.” This suggests intentional concealment rather than inadvertent oversight.
Why Personal Email Use Raises Serious Concerns:
Circumventing Supervision: Firms monitor business communications conducted through firm email systems. Using personal email allows representatives to communicate with clients and third parties beyond the firm’s supervisory oversight.
Intentional Evasion: The phrase “in order to disguise” indicates purposeful conduct designed to prevent the firm from learning about the activities.
Destruction of Records: Personal emails may not be retained or preserved in accordance with securities regulations requiring firms to maintain business communications.
Pattern of Deception: Using personal email to hide activities suggests the representative knew the conduct was prohibited and deliberately chose to conceal it.
Regulatory Violations: FINRA rules require firms to supervise communications with customers. Conducting business through personal email undermines this supervisory obligation.
FINRA has repeatedly emphasized that registered representatives must conduct securities business through firm-approved communication channels. Using personal email, text messages, or messaging apps to discuss business with clients or arrange transactions is a serious compliance violation, particularly when done to evade supervision.
Harry Warnick’s Brief Career: From Investment Banking to Industry Ban
Warnick’s permanent bar ends a relatively short career in the securities industry. His BrokerCheck record reveals a young professional whose career trajectory took a dramatic negative turn.
Registration Status: Not currently registered (barred by FINRA September 15, 2025)
Years in Industry: Approximately 6 years (2018-2024)
Age Indication: Graduated from Villanova University in 2016, suggesting he was likely in his late 20s when barred
Licenses Held:
- Series 7 (General Securities Representative) – passed June 2018
- Series 63 (Uniform Securities Agent State Law) – passed June 2018
- Series 79 (Investment Banking Representative) – passed August 2019
- Series 86 (Research Analyst – Analysis Module) – passed October 2018
- Series 87 (Research Analyst – Regulations Module) – passed July 2018
- Securities Industry Essentials Examination (SIE) – passed October 2018
Education:
- Villanova University (August 2012 – May 2016)
- Wake Forest University (July 2016 – May 2017)
Employment History:
- Spartan Capital Securities, LLC (December 2022 – September 2024) – Vice President / Investment Banking – Terminated
- Benchmark Investments, LLC (September 2022 – November 2022) – Associate, Investment Banking
- Houlihan Lokey Capital, Inc. (June 2021 – October 2022) – Financial Analyst
- Benchmark Investments, Inc. (June 2020 – May 2021) – Associate
- Unemployed (March 2020 – June 2020) – During COVID-19 pandemic
- B. Riley FBR, Inc. (February 2018 – March 2020) – Associate
- Five Points Capital (July 2017 – August 2017) – Private Equity Summer Analyst
Career Observations:
Investment Banking Focus: Warnick’s licenses (Series 79, 86, 87) and job titles indicate a focus on investment banking and research rather than traditional retail brokerage.
Frequent Moves: Five different firms in six years suggests instability or difficulty finding a suitable long-term position.
Young Professional: Entering the industry immediately after college in 2018 at approximately age 24, Warnick’s permanent bar at roughly age 30 effectively ends his securities career before it truly began.
No Outside Business Activities Reported: Ironically, Warnick’s BrokerCheck record shows “No information reported” under Outside Business Activities, despite being investigated and terminated for undisclosed OBA.
The Dangers of Undisclosed Securities Activities for Investors
The allegations against Warnick illustrate why FINRA strictly regulates outside business activities and private securities transactions. When brokers conduct securities business beyond their firms’ supervision, investors face substantial risks:
Loss of Firm Resources:
No Firm Capital: Private securities transactions aren’t backed by the firm’s capital or financial resources.
No SIPC Protection: The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) doesn’t cover private securities transactions conducted outside member firms.
No Firm Insurance: Errors and omissions insurance maintained by the firm doesn’t cover activities the firm didn’t know about or approve.
No Compliance Review: The transaction doesn’t receive scrutiny from the firm’s compliance department to ensure suitability and proper disclosure.
Increased Fraud Risk:
Ponzi Schemes: Many Ponzi schemes are perpetrated through selling away, as legitimate firms would quickly identify the fraudulent structure.
Unsuitable Products: Representatives may recommend products that wouldn’t pass their firms’ due diligence requirements.
Misrepresentation: Without supervisory oversight, representatives may make false or misleading statements about investments.
Conflicts of Interest: The representative may have undisclosed financial interests in the investment that create serious conflicts.
Legal and Recovery Challenges:
Difficulty Recovering Losses: When investments go bad, pursuing recovery is harder because the firm may have no liability for undisclosed activities.
Unclear Responsibility: Determining who is responsible for losses becomes complicated when transactions occurred outside normal channels.
Limited Documentation: Records may be incomplete or missing entirely, making it difficult to prove what representations were made.
Bankruptcy Risk: If the representative personally guaranteed or facilitated the investment, they may lack resources to make investors whole.
When Young Professionals Make Career-Ending Mistakes
Warnick’s case represents a cautionary tale about how young professionals can make decisions that permanently derail promising careers. Several factors may contribute to such situations:
Pressure and Temptation:
Production Pressure: Investment banking and brokerage environments often emphasize revenue production, creating pressure to pursue every opportunity.
Compensation Incentives: Young professionals with student loans and financial pressures may be tempted by opportunities offering quick commissions or fees.
Peer Comparison: Seeing colleagues succeed financially can create pressure to take shortcuts to keep pace.
Overconfidence: Young professionals may believe they can manage risks or avoid detection that more experienced individuals would recognize as dangerous.
Lack of Experience:
Insufficient Understanding: New registrants may not fully grasp the seriousness of regulations requiring disclosure of outside activities.
Poor Risk Assessment: Inexperience can lead to underestimating the likelihood of getting caught or the severity of consequences.
Inadequate Mentorship: Without strong mentors emphasizing ethical conduct, young professionals may learn bad habits from the wrong role models.
The Escalating Cover-Up:
What often begins as a relatively minor violation (failing to disclose an outside activity) escalates when the individual:
- Realizes they violated regulations
- Tries to conceal the violation rather than self-report
- Uses deceptive means (personal email) to hide ongoing activities
- Refuses to cooperate when confronted
- Compounds the original violation with obstruction
By the time Warnick refused to provide information to FINRA, what might have originally resulted in a fine or suspension became a career-ending permanent bar.
The Critical Importance of Cooperating with Investigations
Warnick’s case demonstrates that refusing to cooperate with regulatory investigations is often more damaging than the underlying conduct being investigated. Had Warnick cooperated fully with both Spartan Capital’s internal review and FINRA’s inquiry, the outcome might have been significantly different.
Why Cooperation Matters:
Mitigating Factor: Full cooperation with investigations is a significant mitigating factor that regulators consider when determining sanctions.
Credit for Honesty: Admitting mistakes and accepting responsibility typically results in lighter sanctions than denial and obstruction.
Negotiated Resolutions: Cooperation allows for negotiated settlements that might include fines or temporary suspensions rather than permanent bars.
Learning from Mistakes: Young professionals who cooperate, accept consequences, and demonstrate understanding can often continue their careers after appropriate sanctions.
Escalation Prevention: What starts as a potential violation becomes multiple violations (original conduct plus failure to cooperate) when obstruction occurs.
When Lawyers May Advise Non-Cooperation:
In rare circumstances, attorneys may advise clients to invoke Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination rather than provide information to FINRA. This typically occurs when:
- Parallel criminal investigations are ongoing
- Information provided could directly lead to criminal prosecution
- The underlying conduct involves potential fraud or theft
However, even invoking the Fifth Amendment in response to FINRA requests typically results in industry bars, as firms cannot employ individuals who refuse to cooperate with regulatory oversight.
Protecting Yourself from Undisclosed Securities Activities
Investors can take several steps to protect themselves from brokers engaged in undisclosed outside activities or private securities transactions:
Due Diligence on Your Broker:
Check BrokerCheck Regularly: Review your broker’s FINRA BrokerCheck record at least annually for new disclosures, employment changes, or customer complaints.
Verify Firm Affiliation: Ensure any investment opportunity your broker presents is offered through their registered firm, not through outside entities.
Ask Direct Questions: Ask explicitly whether the investment is offered through the broker’s firm and whether the firm has conducted due diligence on it.
Request Firm Documentation: Insist on receiving account statements, confirmations, and documentation on firm letterhead, not from separate entities.
Warning Signs of Selling Away:
Outside Entities: The broker introduces investment opportunities through companies or entities not affiliated with their employer firm.
Personal Email Use: The broker communicates about investments through personal email addresses rather than firm email.
Urgency and Secrecy: The broker emphasizes urgency, limited availability, or suggests keeping the investment confidential from others.
Guaranteed Returns: Promises of unusually high or guaranteed returns that seem too good to be true.
Personal Checks: Requests to make checks payable to the broker personally or to entities other than the registered firm.
Off-Site Meetings: Insistence on meeting at coffee shops, homes, or other locations rather than the firm’s office.
Pressure: High-pressure sales tactics suggesting you must invest immediately before the opportunity disappears.
What to Do If You Invested Through Selling Away
If you discover your broker engaged in selling away or undisclosed private securities transactions, take immediate action:
Stop Further Investments: Don’t invest any additional money until you understand the situation fully.
Document Everything: Gather all communications, agreements, checks, confirmations, and documentation related to the investments.
Contact the Firm: Reach out to your broker’s compliance department to determine whether the firm was aware of and approved the transactions.
File a Complaint: Submit written complaints to both the firm and FINRA if the transactions were undisclosed.
Consult an Attorney: Contact a securities attorney who can evaluate whether you have claims against the broker, the firm, or other parties.
Consider FINRA Arbitration: Selling away cases can be pursued through FINRA arbitration, though recovery may be challenging if the firm wasn’t involved.
Report to Regulators: File complaints with state securities regulators and FINRA to alert authorities about the misconduct.
Patil Law, P.C. represents investors nationwide who have been harmed by selling away, undisclosed securities transactions, and broker misconduct. We have over 15 years of experience in securities law and have recovered more than $25 million for clients across 1,000+ cases.
Our Experience with Selling Away Cases
Selling away cases present unique challenges because the broker’s employer firm may not have liability for undisclosed transactions. However, experienced securities attorneys can evaluate:
- Whether the firm knew or should have known about the outside activities
- Whether the firm failed to adequately supervise the broker
- Whether other parties (investment sponsors, co-conspirators) share liability
- Whether the broker has personal assets to satisfy judgments
- Whether criminal restitution may be available if fraud charges are pursued
Attorney Chetan Patil founded Patil Law in 2018 to focus exclusively on representing investors harmed by securities misconduct. Our legal team—including attorneys Gabriela Dubrocq and Patricia Herrera—has extensive experience handling cases involving:
- Selling away and private securities transactions
- Undisclosed outside business activities
- Ponzi schemes and investment fraud
- Breach of fiduciary duty
- 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.
Contact Patil Law for a Free Consultation
If you invested in securities through Harry Warnick or any broker who was engaged in undisclosed outside activities or private securities transactions, contact Patil Law 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.
Common Investor Questions About Selling Away and Industry Bars
What does it mean when FINRA permanently bars a broker?
A permanent FINRA bar is the most severe sanction available to securities regulators, effectively ending a broker’s career permanently. The barred individual cannot work as a registered representative, serve in any supervisory capacity, or associate with any FINRA member firm in any capacity. The only way to re-enter the industry is to petition FINRA for readmission, which requires demonstrating rehabilitation and is rarely granted. Permanent bars are typically reserved for serious misconduct or, as in Warnick’s case, refusal to cooperate with investigations.
Why would FINRA bar someone for refusing to provide information rather than proven misconduct?
FINRA Rule 8210 requires all registered individuals to provide information and testimony during investigations. This cooperation requirement is fundamental to FINRA’s ability to regulate the industry and protect investors. If brokers could simply refuse to answer questions when misconduct is suspected, effective regulation would be impossible. Refusing to cooperate is itself considered a severe violation that demonstrates contempt for regulatory authority. The sanction (permanent bar) must be serious enough to ensure compliance, otherwise brokers facing serious allegations might calculate that refusing to cooperate is preferable to providing incriminating information.
What is selling away and why is it so dangerous for investors?
Selling away occurs when a registered representative facilitates securities transactions outside their employer firm’s supervision and control. It’s dangerous because investors lose critical protections: the firm’s compliance review for suitability, the firm’s capital backing, SIPC insurance coverage, and the firm’s errors and omissions insurance. Selling away is frequently associated with fraudulent schemes because legitimate firms would quickly identify problems that dishonest brokers can conceal when transactions occur outside supervision. Investors may believe they have the full protection of the firm when actually the transactions are completely separate and unsupervised.
Can investors recover losses if their broker was selling away?
Recovery in selling away cases can be challenging but not impossible. If the firm knew or should have known about the outside activities, or if it failed to adequately supervise the broker, the firm may share liability. Some selling away cases involve other parties (investment sponsors, promoters) who share responsibility. If criminal fraud is proven, restitution may be ordered. However, if the broker acted entirely outside the firm’s knowledge and the investment was a legitimate business failure rather than fraud, recovery options may be limited to pursuing the broker personally, who may lack resources to make investors whole.
How can I tell if my broker is engaged in undisclosed outside activities?
Warning signs include: the broker introducing investments through companies not affiliated with their registered firm; communicating about investments through personal email rather than firm email; requesting checks be made payable to the broker personally or to outside entities; insisting on meeting at locations other than the firm’s office; emphasizing urgency or secrecy; promising unusually high or guaranteed returns; and avoiding providing firm documentation for investments. If your broker presents an opportunity, always verify it’s offered through their registered employer firm and that the firm has conducted due diligence on it.
What should young professionals learn from cases like Harry Warnick’s?
Warnick’s case demonstrates how quickly careers can be destroyed by poor decisions compounded by cover-ups. What often starts as a relatively minor violation (failing to disclose an outside activity) escalates when individuals try to conceal it rather than self-report, use deceptive means to hide ongoing activities, and refuse to cooperate when confronted. Full cooperation with investigations, even when mistakes have been made, typically results in far lighter sanctions than obstruction. Young professionals facing pressure should remember that no short-term financial gain is worth permanently losing their career, and mentors and compliance departments exist to help navigate challenging situations before they become catastrophic.
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.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is based on FINRA BrokerCheck records and public regulatory filings. Mr. Warnick consented to the FINRA bar without admitting or denying the findings. 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.