Las Vegas, NV | January 13, 2026 — Las Vegas financial advisor Steven Michael Brundage (CRD# 2597779) is defending himself against a substantial FINRA arbitration claim filed in September 2025. According to BrokerCheck records, clients are seeking $1,212,685 in damages, alleging losses stemming from a concentrated mutual fund strategy, market-timing activities, and the purchase of two proprietary variable annuities over a seven-year period.
The complaint, filed as FINRA Case #25-01937, alleges misconduct occurring between January 2017 and September 2023 while Brundage was registered with Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC. Brundage has been associated with Ameriprise since October 1996, making this a nearly three-decade relationship between broker and firm.
This is not Brundage’s first customer dispute. His record includes a 2008 settled complaint involving a variable annuity that resulted in a $4,131.90 settlement, though Brundage paid nothing personally toward that resolution.
The Current Allegations: A Multi-Year Strategy Gone Wrong
The pending arbitration centers on three primary allegations:
1. Concentration in Mutual Funds
The claimants allege their accounts were improperly concentrated in mutual funds. While mutual funds can be appropriate investments for many investors, over-concentration in any single asset class or investment type can expose clients to unnecessary risk. Proper diversification is a fundamental principle of investment management and a key component of the fiduciary duty owed to advisory clients.
2. Market-Timing Strategy
Market-timing—the practice of attempting to predict market movements and moving in and out of investments accordingly—is notoriously difficult to execute successfully. The claimants allege this strategy contributed to their losses over the seven-year period from 2017 to 2023.
Market-timing strategies often result in:
- Increased trading costs and fees
- Tax inefficiencies from frequent realizations of gains
- The risk of missing market upturns while out of the market
- Emotional decision-making during volatile periods
For most investors, particularly those with long-term goals, a disciplined buy-and-hold strategy typically outperforms attempts to time the market.
3. Proprietary Variable Annuities
Perhaps most concerning is the allegation involving “two proprietary variable annuities.” Proprietary products are those manufactured and sold by the same financial institution—in this case, Ameriprise selling its own annuity products to clients through its registered representatives.
The sale of proprietary products raises important questions about conflicts of interest:
- Does the advisor benefit from higher compensation for recommending proprietary products?
- Were alternative products with lower costs or better features considered?
- Were the conflicts of interest properly disclosed to clients?
- Were the annuities truly suitable given the clients’ needs and circumstances?
Variable annuities are complex insurance products that combine investment features with insurance guarantees. They often carry high fees, including mortality and expense charges, administrative fees, investment management fees, and surrender charges that can trap investors for years.
Steven Brundage’s Background and Experience
According to FINRA records, Steven Michael Brundage has been in the securities industry since 1996—nearly 29 years. His career has been primarily with Ameriprise Financial and its predecessor companies.
Current Registrations:
- Ameriprise Financial Services, LLC – Registered Representative (since October 1996)
- Branch offices in Las Vegas, NV and Newport Beach, CA
- Also serves as an Investment Adviser Representative in California, Nevada, and Texas
Licenses and Qualifications:
- Series 7 (General Securities Representative) – passed October 1996
- Series 63 (Uniform Securities Agent State Law) – passed August 1996
- Series 66 (Uniform Combined State Law) – passed March 2001
- Securities Industry Essentials Examination (SIE) – passed October 2018
Brundage is currently licensed to do business in 28 U.S. states and territories, indicating a broad geographic practice.
Other Business Activities: Brundage also reports involvement in music distribution and selling original songs, dedicating 1-9 hours per month to this activity.
The 2008 Variable Annuity Complaint: A Previous Dispute
Brundage’s record includes a 2008 customer complaint that was settled for $4,131.90, though he contributed nothing personally to the settlement. That complaint involved a variable annuity purchased on November 17, 2007.
The client alleged two issues:
- He never received his annuity contract
- The surrender charge period was unsuitable for his needs
The client requested a waiver of surrender charges and a refund of his contract value of $6,351.24.
In his response, Brundage stated that his notes indicated the client had expressed a 10-year-plus investment timeframe, making the surrender charge period suitable. He also noted that a second contract was mailed after the client claimed he never received the original. To maintain good client relations, Ameriprise honored the “free look” period from the date the client received the second contract and reversed the transaction.
While this complaint was settled 17 years ago and involved a relatively modest sum, it establishes a prior pattern of client disputes involving variable annuities—the same product type at the center of the current $1.2 million claim.
Red Flags in Variable Annuity Sales
Variable annuities are among the most frequently cited products in broker misconduct cases. Several factors make them particularly problematic:
High Commission Structure
Variable annuities typically pay brokers substantial upfront commissions—often 5% to 7% or more of the purchase amount. This creates a powerful incentive to recommend them even when simpler, less expensive alternatives might better serve the client’s needs.
Complex Fee Structures
Variable annuities layer multiple fees that can total 2% to 3% or more annually:
- Mortality and expense risk charges
- Administrative fees
- Investment management fees for the underlying subaccounts
- Optional rider fees for enhanced death benefits or income guarantees
- Surrender charges that can last 7-10 years or longer
Surrender Charge Traps
Most variable annuities impose surrender charges if you withdraw money during the first several years. These charges can start at 7-10% and decline over time, effectively trapping your money. For older investors or those who might need access to funds, these surrender periods can be particularly unsuitable.
Tax Inefficiency in Non-Qualified Accounts
When held in taxable accounts, variable annuities convert long-term capital gains (taxed at preferential rates) into ordinary income (taxed at higher rates). This tax inefficiency often negates any benefit from the tax-deferral feature.
Proprietary Product Conflicts
When a firm like Ameriprise recommends its own proprietary variable annuities, additional conflicts arise. The firm profits not only from the sales commission but also from ongoing management fees and insurance charges throughout the life of the contract.
The Significance of a Seven-Year Timeline
The current complaint alleges misconduct occurring from January 2017 through September 2023—a seven-year period. This extended timeframe is significant for several reasons:
- Pattern of Conduct: Rather than a single unsuitable transaction, the allegations suggest an ongoing investment strategy that consistently produced losses.
- Multiple Market Environments: This period encompasses various market conditions, including the COVID-19 pandemic crash and recovery, the 2022 bear market, and multiple Federal Reserve policy shifts.
- Opportunities to Correct Course: A seven-year advisory relationship should have included regular reviews and opportunities to adjust the strategy if it wasn’t working.
- Statute of Limitations: FINRA’s six-year eligibility rule means that only misconduct occurring after September 2019 would be recoverable in the current arbitration. However, a pattern of conduct beginning in 2017 may establish context for the actionable claims.
Can You Recover Losses from Unsuitable Investment Strategies?
If you suffered losses due to unsuitable investment recommendations, over-concentration in proprietary products, or inappropriate market-timing strategies, you may be entitled to recover your losses through FINRA arbitration.
Investors who experienced similar issues—including excessive concentration in mutual funds, market-timing losses, or unsuitable variable annuity purchases—should carefully review their account statements and investment history.
Patil Law, P.C. represents investors nationwide who have been harmed by broker misconduct and unsuitable investment recommendations. Our firm focuses exclusively on securities law and investor protection. We have over 15 years of experience in FINRA arbitration and have successfully recovered more than $25 million for clients across 1,000+ cases.
Our Experience with Variable Annuity Cases
Variable annuity cases require attorneys who understand both the legal standards governing suitability and the complex features of these products. 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:
- Variable annuity unsuitable sales
- Proprietary product conflicts of interest
- Over-concentration and failure to diversify
- Market-timing strategies
- 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.
Time Limits Apply to Securities Claims
FINRA arbitration claims generally must be filed within six years of the alleged misconduct. If you invested with Steven Brundage or another Ameriprise advisor and experienced losses in variable annuities, unsuitable investments, or inappropriate investment strategies, time may be running out to protect your rights.
Don’t let the statute of limitations expire on your claim.
What Should You Do If You Suspect Broker Misconduct?
If you believe you were sold unsuitable variable annuities, suffered losses from an inappropriate investment strategy, or were victims of conflicts of interest involving proprietary products, take these steps:
- Gather Your Documents: Collect account statements, trade confirmations, prospectuses, and any written correspondence with your advisor.
- Calculate Your Losses: Document what you invested versus your current account value, including any withdrawals or additions.
- Review Disclosure Documents: Look for information about fees, surrender charges, and conflicts of interest that may not have been properly explained.
- Consult with a Securities Attorney: A qualified securities attorney can evaluate your potential claim and explain your options for recovery.
Contact Patil Law for a Free Consultation
If you lost money in investments managed by Steven Brundage, or if you have concerns about unsuitable variable annuities, over-concentration, or market-timing strategies with any financial advisor, 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.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the complaint against Steven Brundage?
Steven Brundage faces a pending FINRA arbitration alleging that clients lost over $1.2 million due to an unsuitable investment strategy from 2017 to 2023. The complaint specifically alleges over-concentration in mutual funds, market-timing activities, and the purchase of two proprietary variable annuities.
Can investors recover losses involving Ameriprise Financial advisors?
Yes. Investors who suffered losses due to unsuitable recommendations, conflicts of interest, or breach of fiduciary duty by Ameriprise advisors may be entitled to recover their losses through FINRA arbitration. Ameriprise, like all FINRA member firms, is subject to industry rules requiring fair dealing with customers and suitability in investment recommendations.
What is FINRA arbitration?
FINRA arbitration is a streamlined dispute resolution process specifically designed for securities-related claims between investors and brokers or brokerage firms. 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.
What does “unsuitable investment” mean?
An unsuitable investment is one that does not align with an investor’s financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, or liquidity needs. Brokers and investment advisers have a legal obligation to recommend only suitable investments. Variable annuities, for example, may be unsuitable for investors who need liquidity, cannot afford the high fees, or don’t understand the complex features.
What are proprietary products and why do they matter?
Proprietary products are investment products created and sold by the same financial institution. When Ameriprise advisors recommend Ameriprise variable annuities, for example, the firm profits from both the sales commission and ongoing product fees. These inherent conflicts of interest must be disclosed, and the products must still be suitable for the client despite the conflict.
What should I do if I suspect broker misconduct?
First, gather all documentation including account statements, confirmations, prospectuses, and correspondence. Calculate your losses by comparing what you invested to your current value. Review all disclosure documents for information about fees and conflicts that may not have been explained. Then consult with a securities attorney who can evaluate your potential claim and explain your recovery options through FINRA arbitration.
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 arbitration filings. The allegations described are pending and unproven. 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.