Our firm is investigating J.P. Morgan Securities LLC broker and investment advisor Joachim Daniel Terzi (CRD# 7008502) of Franklin Square, New York for potential investment-related misconduct, including alleged unsuitable trading, churning, unauthorized trading, and related sales-practice violations that were the subject of a FINRA customer arbitration while he was associated with Aegis Capital Corp.
Joachim Daniel Terzi’s Financial Advisor Career History
According to his publicly available FINRA BrokerCheck report, Joachim Daniel Terzi has worked in the securities industry since 2018. Over the course of his career, he has been associated with the following broker-dealers and investment firms:
- J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (CRD# 79) – Franklin Square, New York
- General Securities Representative and Investment Adviser Representative
- Registered with the firm since February 7, 2025
- Works out of branch offices in Franklin Square and Malverne, New York
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (CRD# 7691) – Garden City, New York
- Registered Representative and Investment Adviser Representative
- Brokerage and advisory registrations from August 2022 through February 2025
- Aegis Capital Corp. (CRD# 15007) – Melville, New York
- Registered Representative
- Employed and registered from October 2018 through January 2022
His FINRA record also reflects earlier non-investment employment, including positions in hospitality, construction, and sales roles prior to entering the securities industry.
Joachim Daniel Terzi Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck currently reports one customer dispute disclosure involving Joachim Daniel Terzi. The matter was filed as a FINRA arbitration and has since been closed with an award in favor of the respondents.
2019–2021 Aegis Capital Corp. Customer Arbitration – Alleged Unsuitable and Unauthorized Trading
- Type of disclosure: Customer Dispute – FINRA arbitration (closed with award/monetary judgment for respondents/defendants)
- Reporting sources: Firm and broker
- Employing firm at time of alleged conduct: Aegis Capital Corp. (Melville, New York)
- Time frame of alleged conduct: November 2019 – December 2021
- Allegations: The claimant alleged:
- Suitability violations (unsuitable recommendations and trading)
- Churning (excessive trading in the account)
- Breach of fiduciary duty
- Breach of contract
- Unauthorized trading
- Negligence
- Misrepresentation
- Omission of material facts
- Product type: Listed in BrokerCheck as “No Product” (generally indicating multiple or unspecific securities or strategies)
- Forum: FINRA arbitration, New York, NY
- FINRA Case/Docket No.: 22-02854
- Date complaint received / filing date: December 15, 2022
- Alleged damages: $203,007.00
According to the disclosure, the arbitration was ultimately resolved as an “Arbitration Award/Monetary Judgment (for respondents/defendants).” The status entries reflect that, as of May 2024, the matter was closed with an award in favor of the respondents. No settlement amount or individual contribution is reported for Mr. Terzi, and there is no indication in the disclosure that any payment was made to the customer.
As with all FINRA disclosures, investors should understand that:
- Allegations in customer complaints and arbitrations are not findings of liability by themselves.
- Even when an arbitration panel issues an award for respondents, the underlying allegations may still highlight strategies or trading patterns that warrant closer review by other customers.
Summary of Reported Disclosure
- Customer Disputes:
- 1 FINRA customer arbitration involving allegations of unsuitable and excessive trading, breach of fiduciary duty and contract, unauthorized trading, negligence, and misrepresentation, with claimed damages of $203,007.00, arising from activity at Aegis Capital Corp. between November 2019 and December 2021.
- Status: Closed in 2024 with an arbitration award for respondents; no monetary settlement or individual contribution reported.
If you invested with Joachim Daniel Terzi at Aegis Capital Corp. or J.P. Morgan Securities LLC and believe you experienced similar patterns of high-volume trading, unexplained losses, or trades you did not authorize, you may have potential claims that can be pursued through FINRA arbitration against the brokerage firm that supervised your accounts.
To obtain a copy of Joachim Daniel Terzi’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
FINRA Rule 2111 – Suitability
FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability) requires that a broker have a reasonable basis to believe that any recommended transaction or investment strategy is suitable for the customer based on the customer’s investment profile, including financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, and liquidity needs. The rule also encompasses “quantitative suitability,” which focuses on whether the overall level of trading in a customer’s account is appropriate when the broker has de facto control.
In a case like the one reported for Joachim Daniel Terzi—where a customer alleged unsuitable recommendations, churning, negligence, and misrepresentation—Rule 2111 is often central. A FINRA arbitration panel evaluating such claims would look at whether:
- The risk level, volatility, and concentration of the recommended securities matched the client’s stated objectives and tolerance for loss;
- The frequency and size of trades were reasonably tailored to the customer’s profile, or whether the pattern of trading mainly generated commissions; and
- The broker adequately understood the products and strategies before recommending them, as required under the rule’s “reasonable-basis suitability” component.
Even though the customer arbitration involving Mr. Terzi ended in an award for the respondents, other investors with different facts or account histories may still have strong suitability claims. If a broker’s trading pattern in your account significantly deviated from your objectives or exposed you to more risk than you agreed to bear, that may constitute a violation of FINRA Rule 2111 and related suitability obligations.
FINRA Rule 2010 – Standards of Commercial Honor and Just Principles of Trade
FINRA Rule 2010 requires all FINRA members and their associated persons to “observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.” While broad, regulators frequently invoke Rule 2010 when a broker’s conduct—such as excessive trading designed to maximize commissions, misrepresenting key risks, or ignoring client instructions—falls short of basic ethical expectations even if it does not fit neatly into another, more specific rule.
In the context of the Terzi disclosure, allegations of churning, breach of fiduciary duty, and misrepresentation could all implicate Rule 2010. A pattern of over-trading solely to generate commissions, or executing trades that a customer did not authorize, may be viewed as inconsistent with the high standards of commercial honor required under this rule.
Investors should understand that Rule 2010 can support disciplinary sanctions and may also be cited in FINRA arbitration awards as part of the legal framework for imposing liability on both the broker and the supervising firm. For example, if an arbitration panel finds that a broker knowingly placed their own financial interests ahead of the client’s, it can conclude that Rule 2010 was violated and award compensatory damages accordingly.
FINRA Rule 2090 – Know Your Customer
FINRA Rule 2090 (Know Your Customer) obligates brokerage firms and their associated persons to use reasonable diligence at account opening, and throughout the relationship, to know the essential facts about every customer and the authority of each person acting on the customer’s behalf. Those “essential facts” include information needed to:
- Effectively service the customer’s account;
- Act in accordance with special handling instructions;
- Understand the authority of each person acting on the account; and
- Comply with applicable laws, regulations, and rules.
In disputes involving allegations of unsuitable trading, unauthorized activity, or misrepresentation, investors often argue that the broker and firm failed to adequately learn or update key facts about their financial situation, investment goals, risk tolerance, or liquidity needs. If a customer’s account is heavily traded with high-risk strategies despite conservative objectives or limited risk capacity, that may signal violations of both Rule 2090 and Rule 2111.
Where customers argue that they did not authorize certain trades, or that the broker exceeded the authority granted, arbitrators may scrutinize how the account was opened, what discretionary or non-discretionary authority was documented, and whether the firm’s “Know Your Customer” procedures were followed. Persistent misunderstandings about risk, strategy, or trading authority can be evidence that the firm failed to satisfy Rule 2090’s diligence requirements.
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., is a nationally recognized stockbroker fraud law practice that represents investors in securities fraud cases and FINRA arbitrations on a contingency fee basis. Robert Wayne Pearce previously defended major brokerage firms and now uses that insight to protect investors nationwide. To learn more about how the firm assists victims of broker misconduct, you can visit its stockbroker fraud resource page or call (800) 732-2889 or email pearce@rwpearce.com for a free consultation.