Michael Frederick Siegel of BMA Securities in Rolling Hills Estates, California

Michael Frederick Siegel is currently a registered representative of BMA Securities in Rolling Hills Estates, California.  Between November 2005 and June 2007, he was a registered representative of FSC Securities Corporation in Beverly Hills, California.

In February 2009, the National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”) announced that Mr. Siegel was fined $30,000 and suspended for six months for a combination of private securities and suitability violations. In addition, he was ordered to pay $400,300 in restitution to public customers. As indicated in more detail below, Mr. Siegel appealed NASD’s decision.  His sanctions are not in effect until his appeal is resolved. Thus, Mr. Siegel is not currently suspended.

We are currently investigating Mr. Siegel.  If you or an organization with which you are affiliated have entrusted your money to Mr. Siegel, we would like to hear from you.

FURTHER READING

In February 2009, NASD ordered the suspension of Michael Frederick Siegel for six Months. The NASD issued the following report regarding disciplinary actions relating to Michael Frederick Siegel:

Michael Frederick Siegel (CRD #1001893, Registered Representative, Beverly Hills, California) was fined $20,000 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for six months for private securities violations, and fined $10,000 and suspended from association with any FINRA member in any capacity for six months for suitability violations. The suspensions are to be served concurrently. Siegel was also ordered to pay $400,300 in restitution to public customers. The SEC sustained FINRA’s disciplinary action following an appeal of a NAC decision. The sanctions were based on findings that Siegel engaged in private securities transactions without prior written notice to his member firm. The findings stated that Siegel recommended and effected the sale of securities to public customers without reasonable grounds for believing that the recommendations and resultant sales were suitable for the customers. The U.S. Court of Appeals was petitioned for review, and the sanctions are not in effect pending consideration of the petition. (FINRA Case #C0520020055)