Our firm is investigating Boustead Securities and Sutter Securities broker Brian Joseph Lombardi (CRD# 4227216), an investment professional registered in Irvine, California and Boca Raton, Florida, for potential investment-related misconduct tied to an allegedly unsuitable alternative investment sold in 2017.
Stockbroker’s Career History
According to his FINRA BrokerCheck report, Brian Joseph Lombardi has been in the securities industry since 2000 and is currently registered as a General Securities Representative with Boustead Securities, LLC (CRD# 141391) and Sutter Securities Incorporated (CRD# 30770).
Over the course of his career, Mr. Lombardi has been registered with a number of brokerage firms, including:
- Boustead Securities, LLC (Irvine, CA) – Registered since October 5, 2023
- Sutter Securities Incorporated (Irvine, CA / Boca Raton, FL) – Registered since August 31, 2023
- I-Bankers Direct, LLC (Boca Raton, FL) – February 2019 to August 2023
- Aegis Capital Corp. (Boca Raton, FL) – December 2014 to February 2019
- IAA Financial LLC (Boca Raton, FL) – September 2009 to January 2015
- GunnAllen Financial, Inc. (Boca Raton, FL and Tampa, FL) – August 2002 to June 2003; October 2004 to October 2009
- LH Ross & Company, Inc. (Boca Raton, FL) – January 2004 to October 2004
- Continental Broker-Dealer Corp. (Carle Place, NY) – May 2003 to January 2004
- Kimberly Securities, Inc. (Huntington, NY) – April 2002 to October 2002
- Seaboard Securities, Inc. (Florham Park, NJ) – February 2001 to May 2002
- Morgan Wilshire Securities, Inc. (Garden City, NY) – October 2000 to March 2001
Mr. Lombardi has passed the Series 7 (General Securities Representative), Series 24 (General Securities Principal), and Series 63 (Uniform Securities Agent State Law) examinations, as well as the Securities Industry Essentials (SIE) exam, and is licensed in dozens of U.S. states and territories.
Brian Joseph Lombardi Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck discloses one pending customer dispute involving Brian Joseph Lombardi. The disclosure arises from a customer-initiated FINRA arbitration relating to an “alternative investment” purchased while he was associated with Aegis Capital Corp.
According to the firm-reported disclosure, the claimants allege that an alternative investment recommended to them in or around June 2017 was unsuitable. The matter has been filed as a FINRA arbitration in Denver, Colorado under Docket/Case No. 25-01700 and remains pending. The claimants seek approximately $99,500 in damages.
A separate version of the same disclosure submitted by Mr. Lombardi states that the complaint “stems from activity that took place in 2017,” that it involves an alternative investment, and that he “deny[s] all allegations and intend[s] on seeking a judicious resolution.” The arbitration filing date is reported as August 15, 2025, and the complaint is still pending with no settlement or award reported as of the most recent update.
At this stage, the allegations are unproven, and no FINRA arbitration panel or court has made any findings of liability against Mr. Lombardi in connection with this dispute. However, investors who were recommended complex or illiquid alternative investments that did not match their risk tolerance, time horizon, or financial objectives may have potential claims for unsuitability and related sales-practice violations.
Summary of the Pending FINRA Customer Dispute
- Type of disclosure: Customer dispute – pending FINRA arbitration
- Reporting sources: Aegis Capital Corp. (firm) and Brian Joseph Lombardi (broker)
- Time frame of alleged conduct: June 2017
- Product involved: Alternative investment (alternative investment product, unspecified)
- Core allegation: Product was unsuitable for the claimants
- Claimed damages: Approximately $99,500
- Forum and location: FINRA arbitration, Denver, Colorado
- Docket/Case number: 25-01700
- Filing date: August 15, 2025
- Status: Complaint and arbitration currently pending; no reported settlement or award
To obtain a copy of Brian Joseph Lombardi’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
If a FINRA arbitration panel ultimately finds that the alternative investment was unsuitable for the claimants described in the pending complaint, it may conclude that Mr. Lombardi and his firm violated Rule 2111 and award damages to compensate the investors for their losses.
In addition to suitability, FINRA Rule 2010 (Standards of Commercial Honor and Just and Equitable Principles of Trade) is often implicated in cases involving alleged misrepresentations or omissions about investment products. Rule 2010 is a broad ethical standard that requires brokers and member firms to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade in the conduct of their business.
In the pending dispute involving Mr. Lombardi’s 2017 alternative-investment recommendation, arbitrators may examine whether the customers were fully and fairly informed about the product’s risks, liquidity restrictions, and potential downsides, and whether any sales presentations or discussions painted an overly optimistic or incomplete picture. Even if a panel finds no technical suitability violation, it could still find a violation of Rule 2010 if it concludes that the broker’s conduct fell short of the ethical standards expected in the industry—for example, by overstating safety or income potential, downplaying volatility, or failing to disclose material risks.
Finally, cases involving allegedly unsuitable alternative-investment recommendations can raise issues under FINRA Rule 3110, which governs brokerage firms’ supervisory obligations. Rule 3110 requires firms to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and FINRA rules, including procedures for reviewing and approving recommendations of higher-risk or complex products such as alternative investments.
In the arbitration connected to Mr. Lombardi’s 2017 recommendation at Aegis Capital Corp., arbitrators may ask:
- Whether the firm had written supervisory procedures governing the sale of alternative investments
- Whether supervisors adequately reviewed the transaction for suitability before approval
- Whether the firm monitored concentrations in alternative products within customer accounts
- Whether any red flags about the customers’ risk profile or the product’s characteristics were ignored
If a panel determines that supervisory systems were inadequate, or that existing procedures were not followed, it may find the firm liable for failing to supervise under Rule 3110 and hold it responsible—sometimes along with the individual broker—for the customers’ resulting losses.
For over 45 years, Robert Wayne Pearce has helped investors recover losses caused by broker fraud, negligence, and unsuitable recommendations. His firm, The Law Offices of Robert Wayne Pearce, P.A., represents clients nationwide on a no-recovery, no-fee basis. Call (800) 732-2889 or email pearce@rwpearce.com for a free case review with an experienced securities attorney.