CFP Board Imposes Public Sanctions on 40 Individuals

Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) announced today public sanctions against 40 current or former CFP® professionals, effective immediately or on the date noted in each case. Public sanctions taken by CFP Board, in order of increasing severity, include Public Censures, Suspensions, Temporary Bars, Permanent Bars and Revocations of the right to use the CFP® marks.

In December 2020, CFP Board announced that it had completed background checks on all CFP® professionals to detect potential misconduct that previously had not been reported to CFP Board. Misconduct can include regulatory actions, firm terminations, customer complaints, arbitrations, and civil court litigation that involve professional conduct, criminal matters, bankruptcies, civil judgments, and tax liens. From these background checks, CFP Board opened “Historical Investigations” into the conduct of 1,266 CFP® professionals. More than half of the 40 public sanctions announced in this news release are the result of those Historical Investigations.

“CFP Board continues to hold CFP® professionals accountable if we determine that they violate CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct,” said Thomas Sporkin, Managing Director, Enforcement at CFP Board. “Our enforcement process is defined and comprehensive, yet fair to those whose conduct is being evaluated and credible to the public. Our enforcement program is a critical consumer benefit that sets CFP® certification apart from other credentials and designations in the financial services industry.”

CFP Board’s Enforcement Process
As part of their certification, CFP® professionals make a commitment to CFP Board to abide by CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards), or its predecessor, the Standards of Professional Conduct (Standards), which included the Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Rules of Conduct and Financial Planning Practice Standards. CFP Board’s Procedural Rules set forth the process for investigating matters and imposing sanctions where violations have been found.

CFP Board enforces its ethical standards by investigating alleged violations and, where there is probable cause to believe there are grounds for sanction, presents a Complaint containing the alleged violations to CFP Board’s Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Commission meets at least six times a year to review any matter in which CFP Board has alleged that a CFP® professional has violated the Code and Standards, or its predecessor Standards. The Commission functions in accordance with the Procedural Rules and reviews all matters on a case-by-case basis, considering the details specific to an individual case.

If the Commission determines there are grounds for sanction, then it may impose a sanction. More information on CFP Board’s enforcement process can be found at CFP.net/ethics/enforcement.

The Public Sanctions
A short summary of each sanction can be found below. At CFP.net/verify-a-cfp-professional, CFP Board provides the public with:

• The ability to check on any individual’s CFP Board disciplinary history and CFP® certification status.
• Links to other sources of information about CFP® professionals that may be more recent or that may contain information that has not led to CFP Board discipline and does not appear on CFP Board’s website. This information may include customer disputes, disciplinary actions taken by a regulator or employer, certain criminal matters and certain financial matters (such as bankruptcy proceedings and unpaid judgments or liens).
• Links to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) BrokerCheck and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Investment Adviser Public Disclosure databases for individuals who are subject to FINRA or SEC oversight.

PUBLIC CENSURE

IOWA

Tiffany Lensch, CFP® (Bettendorf, Iowa): In April 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Ms. Lensch received a Public Censure. Pursuant to Section E.2 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct (Code and Standards), a CFP® professional may not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on his or her integrity or fitness as a CFP® professional, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. Such conduct includes a personal bankruptcy or business bankruptcy filing or adjudication where the CFP® professional was a Control Person of the business, unless the CFP® professional can rebut the presumption that the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly the CFP® professional’s or the business’s financial affairs. On July 10, 2020, Ms. Lensch filed for a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Ms. Lensch admitted the bankruptcy but denied that the existence of the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly her financial affairs and requested a hearing to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she could rebut the presumption. The Commission concluded that, although Respondent was involved in an accident that contributed to her financial difficulties, her financial issues began well before the accident occurred and caused her bankruptcy; therefore, she did not meet her burden in rebutting the presumption that the bankruptcy demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly her financial affairs. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that Ms. Lensch violated Standard E.2.c. of the Code and Standards and issued to her a Public Censure.

NEW JERSEY

Raymond M. Daino, CFP® (Cedar Grove, New Jersey): In April 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Daino received a Public Censure. In addition, the Commission required Mr. Daino to perform additional remedial work by certifying one year from the effective date of the order the following statements: (1) He has established a plan to resolve any outstanding tax balance with the IRS in the form of: (a) an OIC that has been accepted by the IRS; (b) a proposed Installment Agreement that has been accepted by the IRS; or (c) a proposed Installment Agreement that has not been rejected by the IRS; and (2) He has fully complied with all requirements of the established plan. Any failure to comply with these requirements shall be considered a default, as defined by Article 11.4 of the Procedural Rules, with Mr. Daino then subject to an Administrative Order of Suspension for one year and one day. The Commission issued its order after determining that Mr. Daino failed to timely pay taxes to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for nine years from 2000 to 2015, resulting in the IRS filing three federal tax liens against Mr. Daino totaling more than $105,000. The Commission determined that Mr. Daino’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, which provides that a certificant shall not engage in conduct which reflects adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, or upon the profession. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Daino a Public Censure and ordered the additional remedial work described.

MINNESOTA

Michael J. Haglin, CFP® (Hopkins, Minnesota): In April 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Haglin entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which the Commission issued to Mr. Haglin a Public Censure. The Commission imposed this sanction after determining that Mr. Haglin was convicted of misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated in 2018 and again of misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated in 2019. Mr. Haglin further consented to these findings, including that he failed to timely disclose the 2018 misdemeanor conviction to CFP Board, misrepresenting on a CFP Board Ethics Declaration in June 2020 that he had only been convicted of a single offense. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Haglin also consented to the Commission’s finding that his conduct violated Rules 6.2 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for the sanction imposed. Accordingly, the Commission issued Mr. Haglin a Public Censure.

VIRGINIA

Peter Burnham, CFP® (Ashburn, Virginia): In January 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Burnham entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which Mr. Burnham received a Public Censure. In the Consent Order, Mr. Burnham consented to CFP Board's findings that he failed to perform his professional services with dedication to the lawful objectives of his firm by making trades on two customer accounts without getting specific written or verbal confirmation from the customers and entering incorrect information in internal notetaking systems related to these transactions, each of which led to his voluntary resignation from his firm in January 2018. Mr. Burnham also consented to CFP Board's finding that, in March 2018 the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued to Mr. Burnham a Cautionary Action Letter (CAL) in which it determined that Mr. Burnham's conduct with respect to the trades violated FINRA Rule 2510(b). Finally, Mr. Burnham consented to CFP Board's finding that, in September 2018 he failed to meet all CFP Board requirements, including continuing education requirements, to retain the right to use the CFP® marks, when he made a false statement to CFP Board on his Ethics Declaration about his 2018 resignation and FINRA CAL to CFP Board. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Burnham consented to findings that his conduct violated Rules 4.3, 5.1 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for the sanction imposed. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Burnham a Public Censure.

WASHINGTON

Stefan R. Persson, CFP® (Seattle, Washington): In April 2021, CFP Board issued a Public Censure to Mr. Persson after Mr. Persson admitted to filing a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy in the Western District of Washington on May 23, 2019, (“Bankruptcy Matter”) and admitted that the Bankruptcy Matter demonstrates an inability to manage responsibly his financial affairs. Mr. Persson agreed that CFP Board Counsel would issue an Order of Public Censure. Mr. Persson also consented to findings that his conduct violated Article E.2.c. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, providing grounds for sanction pursuant to Article 3.4.c. of the Procedural Rules. Accordingly, Mr. Persson received a Public Censure.

SUSPENSION

GEORGIA

John A. Locke (Atlanta, Georgia): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an order suspending Mr. Locke’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This discipline followed Mr. Locke’s failure to respond to CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and Second NOI within the required timeframe. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Locke failed to timely pay his tax obligations resulting in both the Internal Revenue Service and the State of Georgia filing tax liens against Mr. Locke in 2018 and 2019. Mr. Locke’s conduct could have violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Locke failed to acknowledge receipt of an NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. Pursuant to Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Locke was in default, and CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Locke’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Locke’s suspension was effective as of May 3, 2021.

NORTH CAROLINA

Craig Taffaro (Charlotte, North Carolina): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Taffaro’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This discipline followed Mr. Taffaro’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation (NOI) and Second NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Taffaro was the subject of a customer letter of complaint that settled for $80,794.61 on October 29, 2018. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Taffaro has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Taffaro’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Taffaro’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Taffaro’s suspension was effective as of May 19, 2021.

Blake J. Greiter (Wake Forest, North Carolina): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Greiter’s rights to use the CFP® marks for one year and one day. This order followed Mr. Greiter’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Greiter failed to repay money owed to his previous firm after his resignation. Mr. Greiter’s previous firm subsequently filed a civil complaint with the Superior Court of Westchester County, New York, which issued a judgment in the amount owed against Mr. Greiter. CFP Board also alleged that, to date, Mr. Greiter has not paid off this debt, and the judgment against him remains outstanding. CFP Board further alleged that Mr. Greiter’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Greiter has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Greiter’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension. Mr. Greiter’s suspension was effective as of April 12, 2021.

NEW JERSEY

Jordan Crowley (Wyckoff, New Jersey): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Crowley’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This discipline followed Mr. Crowley’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Crowley was terminated from his firm for his involvement in “a series of questionable money movements in personal brokerage and checking accounts which [Mr. Crowley] turned out to have submitted knowing” that he had insufficient funds in his accounts. CFP Board further sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Crowley misled CFP Board by failing to disclose his termination on his Ethics Disclosure forms. Mr. Crowley’s conduct could have violated Rules 5.1 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Crowley failed to acknowledge receipt of an NOI, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Crowley has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Crowley’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Crowley’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Crowley’s suspension was effective as of April 10, 2021.

OHIO

Tyler Beard (Cincinnati, Ohio): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Beard’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This discipline followed Mr. Beard’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Beard sought and obtained reimbursement from his employer in connection with a program by which his employer reimbursed its employees for personal computer equipment purchases and then knowingly or recklessly retained the reimbursement to which he was not entitled after returning his computer purchase. Mr. Beard’s employer terminated him as a result of this misconduct. Further, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued a Cautionary Action Letter to Mr. Beard regarding this misconduct, finding that his use of the program was inconsistent with high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade and therefore violated FINRA Rule 2010. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Beard’s conduct violated Rules 5.1 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Beard failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Beard has been deemed to be in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Beard’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension. Mr. Beard’s suspension was effective as of April 21, 2021.

Michael A. Thein (Dayton, Ohio): In April 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) and Mr. Thein entered into a Consent Order pursuant to which the Commission issued Mr. Thein a suspension for one year and one day. The Commission imposed this sanction after determining that Mr. Thein failed to pay his federal taxes for four tax years, resulting in three federal tax liens in the aggregate amount of $126,722.88, after having previously admonished Mr. Thein for a similar conduct in 2009. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Mr. Thein also consented to the Commission’s finding that his conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for the sanction imposed. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Thein a suspension for one year and one day. Mr. Thein’s suspension was effective as of April 21, 2021.

OREGON

Nathan M. Oeming (Eugene, Oregon): In April 2021, the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission) issued an order in which Mr. Oeming received a five-year suspension of his right to use the CFP® certification marks. The Commission issued its order after determining that on July 23, 2020, Mr. Oeming pled guilty to Online Sexual Corruption of a Child in the Second Degree in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Lane County. The Commission determined that Mr. Oeming’s conduct reflects adversely on his integrity or fitness as a certificant, upon the CFP® marks, and upon the profession in violation of Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for the sanction imposed. Accordingly, the Commission issued to Mr. Oeming a suspension for five years, calculated from the time of a previously issued CFP Board Interim Suspension Order, effective as of April 29, 2020.

Jon Eric Barber (Tualatin, Oregon): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order suspending Mr. Barber’s right to use the CFP® certification marks for one year and one day. This discipline followed Mr. Barber’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Barber was terminated from his firm for “failing to conduct required annual investment advisory client reviews despite certifying to the Firm that they were completed.” CFP Board further sought to investigate allegations that Mr. Barber misled CFP Board by failing to disclose his termination on his Ethics Disclosure forms. Mr. Barber’s conduct could have violated Rules 5.1 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Barber has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Barber’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Suspension wherein Mr. Barber’s right to use the CFP® marks is suspended for one year and one day. Mr. Barber’s suspension was effective as of April 8, 2021.

PERMANENT BAR

MICHIGAN

Daniel Cadez, Jr. (New Boston, Michigan): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Daniel Cadez, Jr. from seeking CFP® certification. This discipline followed Mr. Cadez’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board’s sought to investigate whether Mr. Cadez violated the Michigan Uniform Securities Act (the Securities Act) by taking and maintaining custody of client funds without obtaining annual audits for the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. CFP Board’s investigation also sought to determine whether Mr. Cadez violated the Securities Act when he distributed a private placement memorandum to investors on behalf of Pishon Partners, LP that stated investors would receive audited annual financial statements; however, no audited financial statements were prepared or distributed to investors for the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Based on Mr. Cadez’s violations of the Securities Act, the State of Michigan entered a consent order in which Mr. Cadez agreed to cease and desist from further violations of the Securities Act, and Mr. Cadez also agreed to the revocation of his Michigan Investment Adviser Representative Registration. Mr. Cadez’s conduct could have violated Rule 4.3 of CFP Board’s Rules of Conduct. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Cadez has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Cadez’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Cadez’s permanent bar was effective as of April 19, 2021.

NEBRASKA

Mark R. Lookabill (Omaha, Nebraska): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Lookabill from seeking CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Lookabill’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Lookabill violated CFP Board’s Terms and Conditions when he failed to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s request for information pertained to an outstanding federal tax lien imposed against Mr. Lookabill in 2018. Mr. Lookabill let his certification lapse and did not engage in CFP Board’s investigation or file an Answer with CFP Board as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Lookabill has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Lookabill’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. The permanent bar was effective as of May 10, 2021.

NEW YORK

Stephen C. Furno (Brooklyn, New York): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Furno from seeking CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Furno’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Furno violated CFP Board’s Terms and Conditions when he failed to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s requests for information pertained to one outstanding federal tax lien filed against Mr. Furno. Mr. Furno, who was certified until he relinquished his CFP® certification in November 2020, failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Furno has been deemed to be in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Furno’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Furno’s permanent bar was effective as of May 2, 2021.

OREGON

Gary G. Linkous (Welches, Oregon): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently barring Mr. Linkous from seeking the CFP® certification. This sanction followed Mr. Linkous’s relinquishment of his certification and his intentional decision to not file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Linkous violated CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate one outstanding federal tax lien and two outstanding state tax liens filed against Mr. Linkous. Mr. Linkous, who was certified until he relinquished his CFP® certification on April 1, 2021, declined to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Linkous has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, and based on CFP Board determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Linkous’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Permanent Bar. Mr. Linkous’s permanent bar was effective as of June 20, 2021.

REVOCATION

ALABAMA

Russell I. Morgan, II (Vestavia, Alabama): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Morgan’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Morgan’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within a required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Respondent entered into a Consent Order with the Alabama Securities Commission for selling securities through his firm into, within and from the State of Alabama without the benefit of registration as an investment adviser or broker-dealer, and for failure to disclose that the investments offered and sold to Alabama residents were securities and required to be registered in the State. In the Consent Order, Mr. Morgan accepted and consented to findings that he effected sales of securities into, within and from the state of Alabama without registration. Finally, CFP Board’s Complaint also alleged that Mr. Morgan misled CFP Board by failing to disclose both his Cease & Desist Order and Consent Order on his Ethics Disclosure forms. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Morgan’s conduct violated Rules 2.1, 4.3, 4.4 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Morgan failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Pursuant to Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Morgan has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Morgan’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Morgan’s revocation was effective as of May 23, 2021.

CALIFORNIA

Thomas W. Chandler (Fresno, California): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Chandler’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Chandler’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Chandler failed to disclose a 2018 termination from his firm in light of allegations that he sold securities in a customer’s account while relying on an unapproved Power of Attorney and a 2020 termination from another firm. CFP Board’s Complaint also alleged Mr. Chandler failed to disclose a 2020 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Cautionary Action Letter following an investigation into his 2020 termination that addressed deficiencies in his conduct relating to affixing a customer’s initials on an account form in violation of firm policy. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Chandler’s conduct violated Rules 5.1, 4.3, and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Chandler failed to file an Answer to the Complaint to CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Chandler has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Chandler’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Chandler’s revocation was effective as of April 10, 2021.

Deborah Sue Anderson (La Quinta, California): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Anderson’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Anderson’s failure to timely file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that she was charged with and convicted of Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol on January 26, 2018, and three times prior in 2000, 2007, and 2013. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Ms. Anderson’s conduct violated Rule 6.2 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Ms. Anderson failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Anderson has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Ms. Anderson’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Anderson’s revocation was effective as of May 27, 2021.

Donald R. Carter (San Diego, California): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Carter’s rights to use the CFP® marks. This discipline followed Mr. Carter’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Carter failed to timely pay his tax liability to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for three separate years causing the IRS to file a tax lien against him. CFP Board further alleged that Mr. Carter’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Carter failed to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Carter has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Carter’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Carter’s revocation was effective as of April 12, 2021.

COLORADO

Andrew D. Slocum (Snowmass Village, Colorado): In February 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Slocum’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction follows Mr. Slocum’s failure to provide proof of compliance with an automatic interim suspension imposed by CFP Board after it received evidence that Mr. Slocum was permanently barred from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) in all capacities on July 22, 2020. FINRA’s bar was based on its findings that Mr. Slocum failed to: (1) respond to FINRA’s May 21, 2020, and June 15, 2020, requests to produce information and documents; and (2) request termination of his suspension within three months of the date of the Notice of Suspension, which resulted in FINRA automatically barring Mr. Slocum from association with any FINRA member in all capacities. Under Article 4.1.c. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Slocum has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Slocum’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Slocum’s revocation was effective as of April 12, 2021.

GEORGIA

Aubrey E. Vaughn, III (Roswell, Georgia): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order revoking Mr. Vaughn’s rights to use the CFP® marks. This order followed Mr. Vaughn’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that on December 11, 2019, Mr. Vaughn entered a “Nolo-Contendere” and “Alford” plea to one non-financial offense in the Superior Court of Fulton County in Case No. CR 19-SC-173439 and received First Offender treatment. Mr. Vaughn received five years of probation, with the ability to petition for discharge without any resulting conviction. CFP Board further alleged that Mr. Vaughn’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Vaughn has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Vaughn’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Vaughn’s revocation was effective as of May 31, 2021.

IDAHO

Patrick McKeown (McCall, Idaho): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. McKeown’s rights to use the CFP® marks. This sanction followed Mr. McKeown’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required time frame. CFP Board alleged that Mr. McKeown violated Standard E.5 of CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate two outstanding federal tax liens filed against Mr. McKeown as well as an outstanding Idaho state tax lien filed against him. Mr. McKeown failed to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. McKeown has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. McKeown’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. McKeown’s revocation was effective as of May 3, 2021.

ILLINOIS

James VanHam (Naperville, Illinois): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. VanHam’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. VanHam’s failure to timely pay the hearing fee or submit a written request and supporting documentation demonstrating a financial hardship to have the fee reduced or waived within 30 calendar days of the date of service of CFP Board’s Complaint, as required by Article 17.4 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. VanHam’s conduct violated Rules 4.3, 4.4, 5.1 and 6.2 of the Rules of Conduct and Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct based upon Respondent’s circumvention of his firm’s supervisory system, the subsequent Financial Industry Regulatory Authority regulatory action against him, his failure to disclose his termination to CFP Board on his Ethics Declaration, and his false and/or misleading statements to CFP Board staff during the course of the investigation. Under Article 4.1.d. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. VanHam has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. VanHam’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. VanHam’s revocation was effective as of May 31, 2021.

INDIANA

Annette Tansey Moore (Mishawaka, Indiana): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Moore’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Moore’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Ms. Moore violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when she failed to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate one outstanding federal tax lien and two outstanding Indiana state tax liens filed against Ms. Moore. Ms. Moore failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Moore has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Ms. Moore’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Moore’s revocation was effective as of April 12, 2021.

MISSISSIPPI

Richard D. Powell (Clarksdale, Mississippi): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Powell’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Powell’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Powell violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to provide the requested information in CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s requests for information pertained to three outstanding federal tax liens filed against Respondent from 2012 and 2015. Mr. Powell failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Powell has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Powell’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Powell’s revocation was effective as of April 7, 2021.

NEW JERSEY

Laure A. Scaturo (Millstone Township, New Jersey): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Scaturo’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Ms. Scaturo’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Ms. Scaturo violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when she failed to provide the requested information in CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s requests for information pertained to the four outstanding federal tax liens filed against Ms. Scaturo for the tax years 2011 to 2015. Ms. Scaturo failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Scaturo has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Ms. Scaturo’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Scaturo’s revocation was effective as of April 7, 2021.

OHIO

Michael Iannarino (Columbus, Ohio): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Iannarino’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Iannarino’s failure to acknowledge receipt of CFP Board’s Notice of Investigation, as required by Article 1.1 of the Procedural Rules. CFP Board sought to investigate an action in which the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) barred Mr. Iannarino in all capacities on June 30, 2020. FINRA took its actions based on its findings that Mr. Iannarino: (1) failed to respond to FINRA’s March 11, 2020 and March 26, 2020 requests for the production of information and documents pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210 relating to FINRA’s investigation of Respondent’s potential recommendation and sale of promissory notes to four individuals; and (2) acknowledged that he received FINRA’s request and would not produce the information or documents requested at any time. FINRA determined that Mr. Iannarino’s failure to respond to FINRA’s requests warranted a permanent bar under FINRA Rule 8210 and 2010. Mr. Iannarino’s conduct could have violated Standard 8.a of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Iannarino has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Iannarino’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Iannarino’s revocation was effective as of April 12, 2021.

Michael Richard De Marco (West Chester, Ohio): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. De Marco’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. De Marco’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. De Marco violated his firm’s and industry standards after being terminated from his firm for wrongfully retaining funds granted via the firm’s computer reimbursement program. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) found in an August 2019 Cautionary Action Letter that Mr. De Marco’s conduct with respect to the computer reimbursement violated FINRA Rule 2010. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. De Marco’s conduct violated Rules 5.1 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. De Marco failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. De Marco has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. De Marco’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. De Marco’s revocation was effective as of April 10, 2021.

PENNSYLVANIA

Timothy A. Hanna (Bridgeville, Pennsylvania): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Hanna’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Hanna’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Hanna was convicted in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Pennsylvania of the violent felony of Aggravated Assault, as defined in Article 7.1 of the Procedural Rules. Mr. Hanna’s conviction for Aggravated Assault was based on his assault of the wife of the coach of the hockey team for his 16-year old son. The Court of Common Pleas found that Mr. Hanna recklessly committed Aggravated Assault and caused serious bodily injury to the coach’s wife. Mr. Hanna was initially sentenced to 11½ months to 23 months of imprisonment, but the sentence was modified to 18 months of house arrest following Mr. Hanna’s release on bond pending appeal. Mr. Hanna ultimately appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, and on June 2, 2020, Mr. Hanna’s appeal was denied. CFP Board’s Complaint further alleged that Mr. Hanna’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct, providing grounds for discipline. Mr. Hanna failed to file an Answer to the Complaint to CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Hanna has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Hanna’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Hanna’s revocation was effective as of April 19, 2021.

SOUTH CAROLINA

Barry S. Capps (Myrtle Beach, South Carolina): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Capps’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Capps’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Capps violated Standard E.5 of CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to satisfy his Duty of Cooperation by refusing to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information and a Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board sought to investigate an outstanding federal tax lien filed against Mr. Capps. Mr. Capps failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Capps has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Capps’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Capps’s revocation was effective as of May 10, 2021.

TENNESSEE

David P. Antypas, (Franklin, Tennessee): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an order in which Mr. Antypas received a permanent revocation of his right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed an appeal of an October 2020 decision by the Disciplinary and Ethics Commission (Commission). The Code and Standards Enforcement Committee of CFP Board (Enforcement Committee, formerly known as the Appeals Committee) affirmed the Commission’s finding that Mr. Antypas (a) failed to uphold his fiduciary duty when he engaged in dishonest and unethical practices by recommending Client designate his family members as beneficiaries on Client’s accounts knowing the money would eventually come to him upon Client’s passing; (b) failed to perform professional services with dedication to the lawful objectives of his employer when he repeatedly circumvented firm policy by first recommending Client to list his wife and then his sister as the sole beneficiary on Client’s accounts; (c) received a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) pursuant to which FINRA imposed a two-year suspension on Respondent due to these activities; (d) was subject to an Order of Denial by the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance on his applications for registration and contended that Mr. Antypas used his position of trust to take advantage of an elderly client by overcharging her fees, in addition to allowing her to name Mr. Antypas’ family members as beneficiaries of her accounts; and (e) failed to timely disclose that the investigation by FINRA and the Department in 2018 and his termination for cause in 2017 on applicable CFP Board Renewal Applications as required by the Disciplinary Rules. The Enforcement Committee affirmed the Commission’s determination that Mr. Antypas’ conduct violated Rules 1.4, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, and 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct and provided grounds for sanction pursuant to Articles 3(a), 3(d), and 3(g) of the Disciplinary Rules. CFP Board issued to Mr. Antypas a revocation, which was effective April 16, 2021.

Bryce Patrick Jenney (Nashville, Tennessee): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Jenney’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Jenney’s failure to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information regarding his 2018 termination from his firm, and 2020 permanent bar from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). In FINRA’s Order permanently barring Mr. Jenney from association, it found that Mr. Jenney was terminated from his employment following allegations that he provided investment advice on a product not available through the firm. Mr. Jenney replied to FINRA’s initial Rule 8210 request for information, but after that, failed to respond and failed to show up twice to give testimony. Mr. Jenney failed to respond to CFP Board’s requests for information, as required by Standard E.5. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct. In accordance with Article 4.1(b) of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Jenney has been deemed in default. Therefore, pursuant to Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Jenney’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Jenney’s revocation was effective as of April 25, 2021.

TEXAS

Jarrod R. Leisure (Frisco, Texas): In May 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Leisure’s rights to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Leisure’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Leisure violated Standard E.5 of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct when he failed to provide the requested information in CFP Board’s requests for information and Notice of Failure to Cooperate. CFP Board’s requests for information pertained to a federal tax lien filed against Respondent for the tax year 2012. Mr. Leisure failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules, effective June 30, 2020. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Leisure has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Leisure’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Leisure’s revocation was effect as of June 10, 2021.

Trajko Papuckoski, (Carrollton, Texas): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Papuckoski’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Papuckoski’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that, according to Denton County Criminal Court #1, Mr. Papuckoski was charged with Assault with Family Violence. Additionally, according to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Mr. Papuckoski filed for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy in July 2020. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Papuckoski’s conduct violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. CFP Board’s Complaint also alleged that Mr. Papuckoski’s conduct violated Standard E.2.c. of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, placing the responsibility of rebuttal on the Respondent. Mr. Papuckoski failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Papuckoski has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Papuckoski’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Papuckoski’s revocation was effective as of May 2, 2021.

Benjamin Lane Carrick (Dallas, Texas): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Carrick’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Carrick’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint alleging that Mr. Carrick violated Rule 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct based upon Mr. Carrick’s failure to pay federal taxes each year for five separate years. Mr. Carrick failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.a. of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Carrick has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Mr. Carrick’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Carrick’s revocation was effective as of May 10, 2021.

Carol A. Hearn (Waller, Texas): In April 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Ms. Hearn’s rights to use the CFP® marks. This discipline followed Ms. Hearn’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Ms. Hearn was convicted of Driving While Intoxicated on two separate occasions in 2015 and 2016. Furthermore, CFP Board alleged Ms. Hearn failed to disclose either event to CFP Board in a timely manner. CFP Board further alleged that Ms. Hearn’s conduct violated Rules 6.2 and 6.5 of the Rules of Conduct. Ms. Hearn failed to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1.b. of the Procedural Rules, Ms. Hearn has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope, and harmfulness of Ms. Hearn’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Ms. Hearn’s revocation was effective as of May 2, 2021.

VIRGINIA

Douglas Stopkey (Richmond, Virginia): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an administrative order permanently revoking Mr. Stopkey’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This discipline followed Mr. Stopkey’s failure to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within the required timeframe. CFP Board alleged that Mr. Stopkey entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), in which he was suspended from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity for 30 days for exercising discretion without written authorization and causing the firm to maintain inaccurate books and records. Mr. Stopkey also agreed to a Settlement Order (Order) with the Virginia State Corporations Commission Division of Securities and Retail Franchising (Virginia Commission). The Order alleged that Mr. Stopkey (1) on two occasions executed a transaction on behalf of a customer without the authority to do so; (2) on at least seven occasions exercised discretionary power in effecting transactions for customer accounts without first obtaining written discretionary authority from the customer; and (3) on at least 46 occasions marked an order ticket or confirmation as unsolicited when in fact the transactions were solicited. The Virginia Commission ordered Mr. Stopkey to pay $10,000 in monetary penalties and $5,000 for the costs of investigation. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Stopkey’s conduct violated Rules 4.3, 4.4 and 5.1 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Stopkey failed to file an Answer to the Complaint with CFP Board within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Under Article 4.1 of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Stopkey has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Stopkey’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Stopkey’s revocation was effective as of April 12, 2021.

WASHINGTON

Philip E. Multop (Belligham, Washington): In March 2021, CFP Board issued an order permanently revoking Mr. Multop’s right to use the CFP® certification marks. This sanction followed Mr. Multop’s failure to Answer CFP Board’s Complaint. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Multop failed to cooperate with CFP Board’s investigation into a customer complaint and a related termination. CFP Board’s Complaint alleged that Mr. Multop’s conduct violated Rule 6.1 of the Rules of Conduct. Mr. Multop failed to file an Answer to CFP Board’s Complaint within 30 calendar days of the date of service, as required by Article 3.2 of the Procedural Rules. Pursuant to Article 4.1a of the Procedural Rules, Mr. Multop has been deemed in default. In accordance with Article 4.2 of the Procedural Rules, based on CFP Board’s determination of the seriousness, scope and harmfulness of Mr. Multop’s conduct, CFP Board issued an Administrative Order of Revocation. Mr. Multop’s revocation was effective as of April 10, 2021.

ABOUT CFP BOARD

Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. is the professional body for personal financial planners in the U.S. CFP Board sets standards for financial planning and administers the prestigious CFP® certification – one of the most respected certifications in financial services – so that the public has access to and benefits from competent and ethical financial planning. CFP Board, along with its Center for Financial Planning, is committed to increasing the public’s awareness of CFP® certification and access to a diverse, ethical and competent financial planning workforce. Widely recognized by firms and consumer groups as the standard for financial planning, CFP® certification is held by more than 89,000 people in the United States.

CONTACT: John Pappas, Director of External Communications, [email protected], 202-379-2246.