Our firm is investigating Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. broker and Raymond James Financial Services Advisors, Inc. investment adviser representative Peter James Dale (CRD# 5628047) of Memphis, Tennessee for potential investment-related misconduct.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
Peter James Dale is currently registered with Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. as a broker and Raymond James Financial Services Advisors, Inc. as an investment adviser representative. He works from the firm’s branch office located at 6075 Poplar Ave., Suite 335, Memphis, Tennessee 38119.
According to FINRA BrokerCheck, Dale has been registered with Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. since October 1, 2018, and with Raymond James Financial Services Advisors, Inc. since October 2, 2018. His prior registrations include TD Ameritrade, Inc., TD Ameritrade Investment Management, LLC, Scottrade Investment Management, and Scottrade, Inc.
His reported registration history includes:
- Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. — Memphis, Tennessee — October 2018 to Present
- Raymond James Financial Services Advisors, Inc. — Memphis, Tennessee — October 2018 to Present
- TD Ameritrade, Inc. — Memphis, Tennessee / Omaha, Nebraska — February 2018 to October 2018
- TD Ameritrade Investment Management, LLC — Memphis, Tennessee — February 2018 to October 2018
- Scottrade Investment Management — Saint Louis, Missouri — February 2017 to February 2018
- Scottrade, Inc. — Memphis, Tennessee — April 2010 to February 2018
BrokerCheck also reports that Dale passed the Series 7, Series 63, Series 66, Series 9, Series 10, and Securities Industry Essentials examinations. He is reported as holding or having held the Certified Financial Planner designation.
Peter James Dale Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
According to FINRA BrokerCheck, Peter James Dale has one reported customer dispute disclosure. The disclosure is currently pending and involves a FINRA arbitration filed in 2026.
Pending FINRA Arbitration Alleging Over-Diversification and Account Underperformance
The pending customer dispute was filed in FINRA arbitration on March 6, 2026, under Docket No. 26-00524. The complaint was received on March 9, 2026.
The claimant alleges that his accounts were over-diversified and should have appreciated in value more than they did. The employing firm at the time of the alleged conduct was Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
The alleged damages are $1,700,000. The disclosure is currently listed as pending, and no settlement amount or individual contribution amount is reported.
Customer Dispute Disclosure Summary
- Disclosure Type: Customer Dispute
- Status: Pending
- Forum: FINRA Arbitration
- Docket/Case Number: 26-00524
- Filing Date: March 6, 2026
- Date Complaint Received: March 9, 2026
- Firm at Time of Alleged Conduct: Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
- Allegations: Claimant alleges that his accounts were over-diversified and should have appreciated more than they did.
- Product Type: No Product
- Alleged Damages: $1,700,000
- Disposition: Pending
To obtain a copy of Peter James Dale’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link.
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
FINRA Rule 2111 — Suitability
FINRA Rule 2111 requires brokers to have a reasonable basis to believe that a recommendation or investment strategy is suitable for the customer based on the customer’s investment profile, including the customer’s age, financial situation, tax status, investment objectives, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, time horizon, and other relevant factors. In the pending arbitration involving Peter James Dale, the claimant alleges that the accounts were over-diversified and failed to appreciate as expected. If the facts show that the investment strategy was inconsistent with the customer’s objectives, concentration needs, risk tolerance, or account purpose, the alleged conduct may raise suitability concerns under FINRA Rule 2111.
FINRA Rule 2090 — Know Your Customer
FINRA Rule 2090 requires brokerage firms and associated persons to use reasonable diligence to know and retain essential facts concerning every customer and the authority of each person acting on behalf of the customer. In an over-diversification case, the suitability analysis often begins with whether the broker adequately understood the customer’s investment objectives, risk tolerance, financial needs, income requirements, and expectations for account growth. If Dale or Raymond James failed to gather or use essential customer information before implementing the disputed strategy, FINRA Rule 2090 may be relevant to evaluating the alleged misconduct.
FINRA Rule 2010 — Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade
FINRA Rule 2010 requires brokers to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. Although the pending disclosure does not report a finding of wrongdoing, customer allegations involving account mismanagement, poor investment strategy, or unsuitable portfolio construction may implicate Rule 2010 if the evidence shows that the broker failed to act fairly, honestly, or consistent with industry standards. In the Dale matter, the claimant’s allegation that the accounts were over-diversified and did not appreciate as expected may be reviewed in the broader context of whether the broker’s conduct satisfied the ethical standards required by FINRA Rule 2010.
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.