March, 2025 | Based in Waltham, MA
Have you suffered financial losses due to potentially unsuitable investment recommendations? Call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule your no-obligation case evaluation. Our experienced securities fraud attorneys will review your situation and explain your options for recovery.
Key Facts About John Kennedy Ulwick
- Full Name: John Kennedy Ulwick
- CRD Number: 1758865
- Current Location: Waltham, MA
- Current Employers: LPL Financial LLC and Integrated Wealth Concepts LLC
- Office Address: 200 5th Ave, Suite 4010, Waltham, MA 02451
- Registration Status: Registered with 1 Self-Regulatory Organization and 16 U.S. states/territories
- State Licenses: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia
- Experience: In the securities industry since 1987
- Professional Designations: Certified Financial Planner
- FINRA BrokerCheck: 3 customer disputes (2 final, 1 pending)
- Previous Employers: Lincoln Financial Advisors Corporation (2008-2016), Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (1989-2008)
- Ability to Recover Losses: Within FINRA’s 6-year eligibility period for arbitration claims
Pattern of Unsuitable Oil & Gas Investment Recommendations
John Kennedy Ulwick, a financial advisor currently affiliated with LPL Financial LLC and Integrated Wealth Concepts LLC, has been the subject of multiple customer complaints regarding allegedly unsuitable investment recommendations, particularly in the oil and gas sector.
According to his FINRA BrokerCheck report, Ulwick is currently facing a FINRA arbitration claim (case #24-02312) filed in December 2024, alleging that he recommended an unsuitable oil and gas investment. The claim seeks damages of $70,000.
This recent complaint follows a similar pattern seen in a previous arbitration case that was settled in October 2023 for $15,739.64. That case also centered on allegations of unsuitable oil and gas investment recommendations during Ulwick’s time at Lincoln Financial Advisors Corporation.
Ulwick’s Response to Allegations
In response to the current pending complaint, Ulwick has stated: “Lincoln completed due diligence on the investment and approved the investment for use with clients. I relied upon Lincoln’s due diligence of this product as a viable investment for my clients. The investment at issue was suitable at the time that the recommendation was made.”
Regarding the previously settled complaint, Ulwick’s statement claimed: “The only documentation I was presented clearly states the complaint was with Lincoln, not myself. The complaint was about Lincoln, went to Lincoln and settled by Lincoln. I was not a party to this complaint and was not involved in the settlement.”
Understanding Oil & Gas Investments and Their Risks
Oil and gas investments, particularly those in the private placement category, can pose significant risks to investors. These investments typically include:
1. Direct Participation Programs (DPPs)
These investments involve direct ownership interests in oil and gas operations, such as drilling projects or ongoing production. They often take the form of limited partnerships or joint ventures and typically have these characteristics:
- Illiquidity: Most DPPs have no established secondary market, meaning investors may be unable to sell their interests if they need access to their capital.
- Speculation: Success depends on finding and producing viable oil and gas resources, which is inherently speculative.
- Complex tax implications: While these investments may offer tax advantages, they also generate complex tax reporting requirements.
- Capital calls: Some programs may require additional investments beyond the initial contribution.
2. Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs)
MLPs are publicly traded partnerships that often focus on energy infrastructure, such as pipelines or storage facilities. While more liquid than DPPs, they still carry specific risks:
- Sensitivity to commodity prices: Even infrastructure-focused MLPs may be affected by fluctuations in oil and gas prices.
- Distribution reductions: MLPs typically attract investors with high distribution yields, but these distributions can be reduced.
- Regulatory risks: Changes in tax laws or energy regulations can significantly impact MLPs.
3. Energy-Focused Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) or Mutual Funds
While generally more liquid and diversified than direct investments, these funds still expose investors to the volatile energy sector.
Red Flags in Ulwick’s BrokerCheck Report
An examination of John Kennedy Ulwick’s FINRA BrokerCheck report reveals several potential red flags:
1. Pattern of Similar Complaints
The most concerning aspect is the pattern of similar complaints related to unsuitable oil and gas investments. Multiple complaints with similar allegations can suggest a problematic sales practice rather than an isolated incident.
2. Recent Timing of Complaints
The most recent complaint was filed in December 2024, suggesting that issues may be ongoing or recently discovered by affected investors. Given the typical delay between an investment recommendation and the discovery of problems, this timing is noteworthy.
3. History of Customer Disputes
In addition to the oil and gas investment complaints, Ulwick’s record shows a previous customer dispute from 2015 regarding a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) that the client alleged was unsuitable for their investment objectives and risk tolerance. While this complaint was denied by the firm, it follows a similar pattern of alleged unsuitable alternative investment recommendations.
The FINRA Regulatory Framework
Financial advisors are subject to specific FINRA rules designed to protect investors. Three key rules relevant to this case include:
FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability)
This fundamental rule requires that financial advisors have a reasonable basis to believe that their investment recommendations are suitable for the customer based on factors including:
- The customer’s age
- Financial situation
- Investment objectives
- Risk tolerance
- Time horizon
- Liquidity needs
- Tax status
FINRA Rule 2010 (Standards of Commercial Honor)
This rule requires brokers to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. Making investment recommendations without proper disclosure of risks could potentially violate this standard.
FINRA Rule 3110 (Supervision)
This rule requires broker-dealers to establish and maintain a system to supervise the activities of their associated persons. The firm must have written procedures to ensure compliance with securities laws and regulations.
Guidance for Investors Concerned About Their Oil & Gas Investments
If you’ve worked with John Kennedy Ulwick and have concerns about oil and gas investments in your portfolio, consider taking these steps:
1. Review Your Investment Documents
Gather all documentation related to your investments, including:
- Account opening documents
- Investment confirmations and prospectuses
- Account statements showing purchases
- Risk disclosure forms
- Communications with your advisor
2. Assess Performance and Suitability
Compare your investments’ performance to what was represented to you, and consider whether the investments align with your documented investment objectives and risk tolerance.
3. Understand Potential Recovery Options
If you believe you were sold unsuitable investments, you may have several options for recovery:
- FINRA Arbitration: This is the primary forum for resolving disputes between investors and brokers. Claims must typically be filed within six years.
- Mediation: A less formal process that may lead to a negotiated settlement.
- Regulatory Complaints: Filing complaints with FINRA, the SEC, or state securities regulators may trigger investigations, though they rarely result in direct restitution.
4. Consult with a Securities Attorney
A securities attorney who specializes in investment fraud can:
- Evaluate the merits of your potential claim
- Explain the FINRA arbitration process
- Help assess potential damages
- Guide you through the recovery process
Ulwick’s Professional Background and Career
John Kennedy Ulwick has extensive experience in the securities industry, having entered the field in 1987 with John Hancock Distributors, Inc. His career history includes:
- John Hancock Distributors, Inc. (1987-1989)
- Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (formerly IDS Life Insurance Company) (1989-2008)
- Lincoln Financial Advisors Corporation (2008-2016)
- LPL Financial LLC and Integrated Wealth Concepts LLC (2016-Present)
Ulwick holds the Certified Financial Planner designation and has passed multiple industry examinations, including:
- General Securities Principal (Series 24)
- Municipal Securities Principal (Series 53)
- Registered Options Principal (Series 4)
- General Securities Representative (Series 7)
- Uniform Investment Adviser Law (Series 65)
- Uniform Securities Agent State Law (Series 63)
This background suggests significant industry knowledge and experience, which makes the suitability concerns all the more noteworthy.
The Hybrid RIA Business Model
An interesting aspect of Ulwick’s current practice is his affiliation with both LPL Financial LLC (a broker-dealer) and Integrated Wealth Concepts LLC (a registered investment advisor). This “hybrid” model allows advisors to operate under both a commission-based structure (through the broker-dealer) and a fee-based structure (through the RIA).
While this arrangement can provide flexibility, it can also create potential conflicts of interest and confusion regarding which regulatory standards apply to specific recommendations. Broker-dealers are generally held to a suitability standard, while RIAs are held to a fiduciary standard, which requires them to place clients’ interests ahead of their own.
Due Diligence Defense
Ulwick’s statement that he “relied upon Lincoln’s due diligence of this product as a viable investment” raises questions about the level of independent due diligence he conducted. While broker-dealers typically perform due diligence on products they approve for their platforms, individual advisors still have an obligation to ensure that specific investments are suitable for each particular client’s needs and objectives.
The duty to make suitable recommendations cannot be fully delegated to a firm’s due diligence process. Financial advisors must understand the products they recommend and evaluate whether they are appropriate for each specific client.
Potential Recovery Options for Affected Investors
Investors who believe they were sold unsuitable oil and gas investments by John Kennedy Ulwick may have several avenues for seeking recovery:
1. FINRA Arbitration
This is the most common forum for resolving disputes between investors and their brokers. Key points include:
- Claims must typically be filed within six years of the events giving rise to the dispute
- The process is generally faster and less formal than court litigation
- Awards are final and binding, with limited grounds for appeal
- The current pending case against Ulwick is proceeding through this forum
2. Negotiated Settlements
Many investment disputes are resolved through negotiated settlements, either directly or through mediation. The previously settled complaint against Ulwick was resolved in this manner, resulting in a payment of $15,739.64 without any admission of wrongdoing.
3. Firm Liability
Brokerage firms have an obligation to supervise their representatives and may be held liable under a legal doctrine known as “respondeat superior.” Ulwick’s statement that the previous complaint “was about Lincoln, went to Lincoln and settled by Lincoln” suggests the firm’s potential liability for the actions of its representatives.
Forensic Analysis in Investment Fraud Cases
When evaluating potential investment fraud cases, securities attorneys often employ forensic analysis to identify patterns of misconduct. Key analytical approaches include:
1. Concentration Analysis
Examining whether a portfolio contains an excessive concentration in high-risk sectors like oil and gas.
2. Turnover Analysis
Analyzing whether there was excessive trading (churning) to generate commissions.
3. Risk Assessment
Comparing the risk level of recommended investments to the client’s documented risk tolerance and investment objectives.
4. Commission Structure Analysis
Reviewing whether recommendations may have been influenced by higher commission rates on certain products.
The Significance of Multiple Similar Complaints
The pattern of complaints related to oil and gas investments suggests a potential systematic issue rather than isolated incidents. Securities regulators typically pay particular attention to patterns of similar complaints, as they may indicate:
- A failure to adhere to suitability requirements
- Inadequate risk disclosures
- Possible sales practice problems
- Potential supervision failures
How Securities Attorneys Can Help
If you invested with John Kennedy Ulwick and have concerns about unsuitable oil and gas investments, a specialized securities attorney can provide crucial assistance:
- Case Evaluation: Assessing whether you have a viable claim based on suitability standards and documentation
- Damage Calculation: Determining potential recoverable losses
- Claim Preparation: Developing a comprehensive statement of claim for FINRA arbitration
- Evidence Development: Gathering and analyzing account statements, communications, and other evidence
- Representation: Advocating for you throughout the arbitration or settlement process
- Expert Testimony: Bringing in industry experts to support your case when needed
Are you worried about investment losses? Our experienced securities fraud attorneys can review your situation and help you understand your rights and recovery options. Call 800-950-6553 or complete our online form to schedule your no-obligation case evaluation.
