Michael Steven Lee (CRD# 2125681) is a financial advisor and stockbroker currently registered with LPL Financial LLC in Greenville, South Carolina, and our firm is investigating his background in light of a recent customer complaint alleging misappropriation of funds.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
According to publicly available FINRA BrokerCheck records, Michael Steven Lee has been in the securities industry for more than two decades and has been registered with multiple large brokerage firms over the course of his career.
Mr. Lee is currently registered with:
- LPL Financial LLC (CRD# 6413) in Greenville, South Carolina
- Registered with LPL Financial LLC since September 10, 2025
- Listed as both a General Securities Principal, General Securities Representative, and Investment Adviser Representative in various states
His prior registration history includes:
- UBS Financial Services Inc. (CRD# 8174) – Greenville, South Carolina
- Registered as both a broker and investment adviser from June 2009 to September 2025
- J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. (CRD# 79 / 18718 / 16999) – Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
- Held various broker and investment adviser registrations from April 2001 through October 2008, with overlapping registrations under different J.P. Morgan entities
- Banc One Securities Corporation (CRD# 16999) – Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
- Registered as a broker from March 2001 to July 2006
In addition to his core broker-dealer work, FINRA records show that Mr. Lee has reported other business activities, including work as a public speaker and operating under “Ox Road Capital” as a DBA for his LPL business.
Michael Steven Lee Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck reflects one customer dispute disclosure involving allegations of misappropriation of funds related to Mr. Lee’s time at UBS Financial Services Inc..
According to the disclosure:
- Employing Firm at the Time of Events: UBS Financial Services Inc.
- Time Frame of Alleged Conduct:
- From August 10, 2012 to September 2, 2015
- Allegations:
- A trustee alleged misappropriation of funds by Mr. Lee.
- Product Type:
- Listed as “No Product”, suggesting the dispute focused on handling or distribution of funds rather than a specific security or investment product.
- Alleged Damages:
- $0.00 in claimed damages; the disclosure notes “Client made no claim for damages.”
- Date Complaint Received:
- October 1, 2025
- Status of Complaint:
- Denied by UBS Financial Services Inc. on October 14, 2025
- The matter is reported as closed without any settlement or payment.
The BrokerCheck report includes a broker statement explaining Mr. Lee’s position: he asserts that he received a court order directing how funds were to be distributed as part of a court-ordered settlement in which neither he nor UBS was a party. He states that he forwarded the court order to UBS counsel and then distributed the funds according to counsel’s instructions. The complaining party later alleged that the court order was invalid and that it did not contain her true signature, approximately 13 years after the fact. UBS denied the claim and took no action against Mr. Lee.
Summary of Disclosures
Based on the current BrokerCheck record, the reported disclosures for Michael Steven Lee include:
- Customer Dispute (Final – Denied):
- Allegation: Misappropriation of funds by a trustee
- Firm: UBS Financial Services Inc.
- Time Frame: August 10, 2012 – September 2, 2015
- Damages Claimed: $0.00 (no dollar amount requested)
- Status: Denied by the firm and closed on October 14, 2025
- Resolution: No payment to the customer, no finding of wrongdoing
At this time, there are no reported regulatory actions, criminal matters, or arbitration awards against Mr. Lee on his BrokerCheck report; the only disclosed event is the denied customer complaint described above.
To obtain a copy of Michael Steven Lee’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
In the context of the allegations that a trustee’s funds were misapplied between 2012 and 2015, FINRA Rule 2150 addresses the improper use of customer securities or funds, prohibiting brokers from making unauthorized withdrawals, transfers, or disbursements, or using client assets for purposes not expressly authorized by the customer or governing documents. In a dispute such as this, an arbitrator would typically explore whether the broker had clear, documented authority—such as a valid court order or trust instructions—for any distributions made, and whether the firm’s procedures were followed when interpreting and implementing those instructions. When a client later challenges the validity of the court order, as reportedly occurred here, that challenge often raises questions about whether the broker and firm reasonably relied on the document, whether they performed appropriate due diligence, and whether they acted promptly and transparently once the concerns were raised.
Similarly, FINRA Rule 2010, which requires high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade, can be implicated when allegations involve the handling of client funds, even in the absence of a specific product recommendation or investment transaction. Rule 2010 is broad and can apply to any business-related conduct that reflects on a broker’s honesty or integrity, including how they respond to court orders, client instructions, and post-dispute communications. In a fact pattern like Mr. Lee’s, regulators or arbitrators evaluating a misappropriation allegation would look at whether the broker communicated clearly with the trustee, escalated questions about the order to firm counsel (as his BrokerCheck statement indicates he did), and followed the firm’s guidance in good faith. Where a firm denies a complaint and supports the broker’s actions, it often reflects a conclusion that the broker’s conduct was consistent with Rule 2010, though investors may still challenge that conclusion in arbitration.
FINRA’s recordkeeping and documentation rules—such as Rule 4511, which requires firms to make and preserve accurate books and records—also play an important role in disputes involving alleged misappropriation or defective court orders. In situations like the trustee’s complaint against Mr. Lee, a critical part of any investor’s case will be the paper trail: copies of the court order, internal firm notes, distribution instructions, account statements, and any written communications between the broker, the client, and firm counsel. Under Rule 4511, firms must maintain accurate and complete records of these items, and those records often become central evidence in a FINRA arbitration. If the records show that the broker and firm reasonably relied on a facially valid court order after review by counsel, that may support a defense; on the other hand, if records are missing, inconsistent, or suggest that the broker acted outside documented procedures, those gaps can strengthen an investor’s claim that the handling of funds did not meet FINRA’s recordkeeping and supervision standards.
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.