Our firm is investigating NYLIFE Securities financial advisor and registered representative Matthew Ryan Carmichael (CRD# 6886967) of Lakeside, California for potential investment-related misconduct.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
Based on FINRA BrokerCheck, Matthew Ryan Carmichael has been registered with NYLIFE Securities LLC since September 27, 2018 (branch location listed as Lakeside, CA), and became registered with Eagle Strategies LLC as an investment adviser representative effective March 17, 2025 (branch location listed as Lakeside, CA). FINRA’s report also lists an outside business activity/DBA, Fox Legacy Financial and Insurance Solutions, beginning January 2026.
Matthew Ryan Carmichael Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
FINRA BrokerCheck reports one customer dispute disclosure, currently listed as pending, involving a variable annuity.
Pending customer complaint alleging unsuitable variable annuity — purchase in October 2025; complaint received December 31, 2025
According to the disclosure narrative, the customer alleges the variable annuity purchased in October 2025 “was not appropriate” for the customer’s age, liquidity needs, objectives, or planning horizon, and the customer seeks to exit the product without surrender fees. The disclosure states the complaint was received on December 31, 2025 and is pending.
The report lists alleged damages of $0.00, and adds that while the customer did not allege a specific amount, the firm made a good-faith determination that damages would exceed $5,000.00. The matter is described as a written complaint, not an arbitration/civil litigation filing.
Disclosures (for context):
- Customer Dispute (Pending) — Allegation: variable annuity allegedly unsuitable for age, liquidity needs, objectives, and planning horizon; customer seeks exit without surrender fees; Product: Variable Annuity; Activity timeframe referenced: Oct. 2025; Date complaint received: 12/31/2025; Alleged damages: $0.00 (firm’s good-faith determination damages would exceed $5,000); Status/Disposition: Pending.
To obtain a copy of Matthew Ryan Carmichael’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
Why variable annuity suitability complaints matter
Variable annuity disputes commonly focus on whether the product’s liquidity limits, surrender charges, fees, and time horizon align with the investor’s needs and objectives. Allegations that a client wants out “without surrender fees” often put a spotlight on whether surrender schedules and liquidity tradeoffs were fully explained and suitable for the investor’s circumstances.
What investors should preserve if they suspect an unsuitable annuity
Useful records typically include the annuity application, disclosures and prospectus delivery acknowledgments, any “needs analysis” or suitability forms, account statements, trade confirmations, written notes/emails/texts discussing objectives and liquidity needs, and any documentation about surrender periods and charges.
Potential recovery options
Depending on the facts, investors may pursue recovery through FINRA arbitration and related claims, including unsuitable recommendations, misrepresentations/omissions, and supervision failures (where supported by evidence).
Section 5. FINRA Rule 2330 (Members’ Responsibilities Regarding Deferred Variable Annuities) is often central when a complaint challenges the appropriateness of a variable annuity. In a dispute like this—where the customer alleges the annuity purchased in October 2025 was not appropriate for age, liquidity needs, objectives, or planning horizon and seeks to exit without surrender fees—Rule 2330 is commonly analyzed for whether the broker and firm exercised appropriate review and supervision over the recommendation and whether the customer’s liquidity/time-horizon constraints were reasonably considered before the transaction.
Section 6. FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability) is frequently implicated when an investor alleges a product recommendation failed to match their investment profile. In this complaint, the stated issues—age, liquidity needs, objectives, and planning horizon—are core suitability factors, and Rule 2111 is often applied to evaluate whether recommending a variable annuity (with potential surrender charges and limited liquidity) reasonably aligned with what the customer needed and stated they wanted at the time of sale.
Section 7. FINRA Rule 2090 (Know Your Customer) can be relevant in annuity “goals and liquidity” disputes because it requires reasonable diligence to understand and retain essential facts about each customer. Where a customer claims the annuity was not appropriate for their age, liquidity needs, objectives, or planning horizon, Rule 2090 is often evaluated alongside suitability to assess whether the advisor and firm adequately gathered and documented the customer’s essential profile information before recommending the annuity transaction.
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.