Clearly, Odeon was happy to have Nissar onboard. She had all the tools to make it on Wall Street and seemed headed in the right direction. Unfortunately, life is full of surprises. Some of which are quite nasty.Prior to joining Odeon Capital in 2016, Ms. Nissar was with Alliance Bernstein in Sales and Trading focused on the Tech, Media, Telecom space as a Product Specialist where she generated trading ideas and collaborated in running the desk's Media and Internet trading pad which was recognized as the top grossing commission pad on Bernstein's trading desk in 2014. Prior to Alliance Bernstein, Ms. Nissar was at RBC Capital markets in Equity Research covering the Communications Technology space and at Citigroup covering the Homebuilders. Ms. Nissar received a MBA from the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business and is also a graduate of Mount Union College.
Submission of false expense reimbursement reports and/or receipts
An investigation was initiated and is ongoing into possible fraudulent expense items submitted by and/or paid to Representative on expense reimbursement submissions. After initially trying to explain inconsistencies in her expense reports, Ms. Nissar walked out the office and did not return to the Firm. The investigation is ongoing.
For the purpose of proposing a settlement of rule violations alleged by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA"), without admitting or denying the findings, prior to a regulatory hearing, and without an adjudication of any issue, John J. Baldeck submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent ("AWC"), which FINRA accepted. In the Matter of John J. Baldeck, Respondent (AWC 2016050321501, November 12, 2018).http://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/fda_documents/2016050321501%20John%20J
In accordance with the terms of the AWC, FINRA imposed upon Baldeck a Bar from association with any F1NRA member in any capacity. As set forth in the AWC's "Facts and Violative Conduct":Morgan Stanley permitted Baldeck to resign after it found that Baldeck "requested and received reimbursement from the Firm for expenses described as client meal expense[s], when the meals were actually personal in nature." Subsequently, FINRA staff sent a request dated August 9, 2018 to Baldeck to appear and provide on-the-record testimony pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210 on September 14, 2018. Baldeck and FINRA staff subsequently agreed to reschedule the testimony for October 23, 2018. Baldeck appeared for testimony pursuant to Rule 8210 on that date and provided a partial day of testimony. However, before the testimony was complete, Baldeck informed staff that he would not complete his on-the-record testimony that day or at any time. By refusing to complete his on-the-record testimony as requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, Baldeck violates FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010.
Dear Mr. Singer,My firm represents Ms. Nissar concerning her departure from Odeon Capital Group, and her subsequent dealings with FINRA.I am a regular reader of your Broke and Broker blog, and my client and I came across your November 13, 2018 post in which you wrote about her case and others like it. I agree with your observation that FINRA Enforcement has sharpened its focus on expense reports, and that financial services professionals must be careful to avoid missteps that can result in negative career and regulatory consequences.So that your readers will have a fuller view of the context surrounding my client's case, I would kindly ask that you include in your post the fact that FINRA recently agreed to add to her CRD the following broker comment: "I reject my former employer's contention that [I] knowingly submitted for reimbursement fraudulent expense items. The expense report at issue was prepared while I was recovering from surgery in the wake of a serious medical event. To the extent any items were erroneously recorded on the report, such errors were the result of a good-faith mistake. In several instances, the firm's position concerning whether certain expenses were appropriately categorized as business expenses is contrary to the documentary record. Finally, during the internal review that preceded my termination, the firm denied without justification my request to access the records of my business communications. Those records would have definitively [refuted] all or nearly all of the firm's claims regarding my expense reports."Respectfully submitted,Kevin GalbraithThe Galbraith Law Firm