Our firm is investigating Truist Investment Services, Inc. broker and investment adviser Yanette Sullivan (CRD# 5344500) of Orlando, Florida for potential investment-related misconduct involving an allegedly unsuitable immediate annuity purchase without a death benefit.
Financial Advisor’s Career History
Yanette Sullivan has spent her career with large, bank-affiliated brokerage firms serving retail investors in Florida. According to her public record, she is currently registered as a broker with Truist Investment Services, Inc. and as an investment adviser representative with Truist Advisory Services, Inc., working out of a branch office located at 7455 Chancellor Drive in Orlando, Florida.
Before joining Truist, Ms. Sullivan was associated with J.P. Morgan Securities LLC in Kissimmee, Florida, where she held both broker and advisory registrations for several years. Her earlier brokerage experience includes working with Chase Investment Services Corp., also in Kissimmee. Collectively, this background places her in a position of trust, handling retirement and investment assets for clients who rely on her recommendations for income and long-term financial security.
Yanette Sullivan Fraud Allegations and Investor Complaints Explained
Public records disclose at least one pending customer dispute involving Yanette Sullivan tied to her work at Truist Investment Services, Inc. The pending complaint centers on the recommendation and purchase of an immediate annuity:
- The client alleges that Ms. Sullivan purchased an immediate annuity that was unsuitable and without a death benefit in the customer’s account.
- The product is identified as a fixed annuity.
- The customer is seeking $110,000.00 in damages in a FINRA arbitration.
- The matter is filed in FINRA Dispute Resolution in Orlando, Florida, under Docket No. 25-01432.
- FINRA records indicate the arbitration was filed on July 13, 2025, and the complaint was received on July 18, 2025.
- The dispute is currently categorized as a “Customer Dispute – Pending” in Ms. Sullivan’s disclosure history.
In simpler terms, the investor is claiming that the recommended annuity:
- Did not match the customer’s needs and risk profile; and
- Did not include a death benefit, which may severely limit the ability to pass remaining value to heirs if the customer dies earlier than expected.
The absence of a death benefit can be especially significant for retirees or pre-retirees who believe they are balancing lifetime income with some protection for their beneficiaries. When a broker or advisor fails to explain these trade-offs or recommends such a product without properly tailoring it to the client’s profile, regulators and arbitrators frequently analyze whether FINRA’s suitability rules and high-standards-of-conduct rules have been violated.
While this matter remains unresolved and contested, the existence of a pending arbitration is an important red flag for current and former customers of Yanette Sullivan and Truist Investment Services, Inc. Customers who purchased annuities or other income-oriented products should carefully review their accounts and documentation to determine whether their investments were truly suitable and properly explained.
Summary of the pending disclosure
- Type of Event: Customer Dispute – Pending (FINRA Arbitration)
- Firm Involved: Truist Investment Services, Inc.
- Allegations: Purchase of an immediate annuity allegedly unsuitable and without a death benefit
- Product Type: Fixed annuity
- Alleged Damages: $110,000.00
- Forum: FINRA Dispute Resolution – Orlando, Florida
- Docket/Case Number: 25-01432
- Filing Date: July 13, 2025
- Date Complaint Received: July 18, 2025
- Status: Pending
As with all BrokerCheck disclosures, these are allegations only. The dispute may ultimately be denied, settled without any admission of wrongdoing, or resolved in a way that favors the broker or the firm. Nonetheless, such a complaint often signals issues with the recommendation process, risk disclosure, or the suitability of the investment strategy.
To obtain a copy of Yanette Sullivan’s FINRA BrokerCheck report, visit this link
Robert Wayne Pearce Is Committed to Recovering Your Investment Losses
FINRA Rule 2111 – Suitability
FINRA Rule 2111 is the cornerstone of many customer disputes involving unsuitable investment recommendations, including annuity purchases. The rule requires that a broker or associated person have a reasonable basis to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy is suitable for the customer, based on that customer’s investment profile—age, financial situation and needs, tax status, investment objectives, time horizon, liquidity needs, and risk tolerance.
In the pending arbitration, the customer claims that Ms. Sullivan recommended and purchased an immediate fixed annuity without a death benefit that was not suitable for the client’s circumstances. In a suitability analysis, arbitrators will focus on questions such as:
- Did Ms. Sullivan obtain and accurately record the client’s financial profile and objectives, including income needs and estate-planning goals?
- Did she explain that choosing an immediate annuity without a death benefit could result in little or no value passing to heirs if the annuitant dies early?
- Were less restrictive or more flexible options available (such as annuities with guaranteed periods, cash-refund riders, or other death-benefit features) that might have better aligned with the client’s needs?
- Did the overall allocation to the annuity create liquidity risk, leaving the client without sufficient accessible assets for emergencies or changing circumstances?
If arbitrators conclude that the recommendation of this specific annuity—especially one without a death benefit—did not align with the investor’s profile, they may find a violation of Rule 2111’s customer-specific suitability obligation and award damages for the harm caused.
FINRA Rule 2010 – Standards of Commercial Honor and Just and Equitable Principles of Trade
Even when misconduct is framed primarily as a suitability issue, FINRA almost always evaluates whether the conduct meets the broader ethical standard in FINRA Rule 2010. That rule requires members and associated persons, “in the conduct of [their] business,” to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade.
In the context of the allegations against Ms. Sullivan, Rule 2010 may come into play if arbitrators determine that:
- The client was not fully informed about the lack of a death benefit or the irrevocable nature of the annuity income decision.
- Key risks, trade-offs, or alternatives were downplayed or mischaracterized to induce the purchase.
- The recommendation appeared to prioritize commissions or firm sales goals over the client’s best interests.
Even if a broker satisfies the bare minimum of disclosure, conduct that misleads or unfairly disadvantages the client can be viewed as inconsistent with “high standards of commercial honor” and “just and equitable principles of trade,” supporting a Rule 2010 violation.
FINRA Rule 3110 – Supervision
FINRA Rule 3110 requires brokerage firms to establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and FINRA rules, including suitability and complaint-handling obligations.
In a case involving an allegedly unsuitable immediate annuity without a death benefit, Rule 3110 analysis often focuses on whether Truist Investment Services, Inc.:
- Implemented adequate procedures to review and approve annuity recommendations, particularly those that eliminate death benefits or lock in long income periods.
- Monitored annuity sales to detect patterns of unsuitable recommendations or concentration in high-commission, inflexible products.
- Properly documented the client’s profile, the rationale for the recommendation, and any disclosures about the absence of a death benefit.
- Timely and appropriately responded to the customer’s complaint once it was received on July 18, 2025.
If a firm’s supervisory system is found lacking, arbitrators may hold the firm itself liable for losses under Rule 3110, often in combination with Rule 2111 and Rule 2010, even if the individual broker’s conduct is also at issue.
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.