Brett Scott Ellen, Former DFPG Investments Broker, Has $967,999 in Customer Dispute Settlements Disclosed on BrokerCheck

If you are a current or former client of Brett Scott Ellen and you bought alternative investments, private placements, limited partnerships, or variable annuities on his recommendation, FINRA BrokerCheck shows a record of customer disputes that ended in settlements.

Brett Scott Ellen (CRD# 1460478) is a previously registered broker who, according to FINRA BrokerCheck, is not currently registered with any firm. The same record reports 17 customer disputes over the course of his career, and seven of them were resolved through settlements.

Settlement History

Each of the disputes below is drawn from Brett Scott Ellen’s detailed BrokerCheck report. They appear most recent first.

According to BrokerCheck, a customer who invested while Ellen was associated with DFPG Investments alleged breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, material misrepresentations and omissions, and negligence related to alternative investments, in a FINRA arbitration claim (case number 23-01965) served on August 15, 2023. BrokerCheck reports that the customer claimed $204,812.00 in alleged damages and that the dispute settled on February 3, 2025 for $60,000.00, with a $0.00 individual contribution from Ellen.

According to BrokerCheck, another DFPG Investments customer alleged breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, material misrepresentations and omissions, and negligence related to alternative investments, in a FINRA arbitration claim (case number 21-02518) received on November 18, 2021. The BrokerCheck report shows that this customer claimed $1,940,256.00 in alleged damages and that the matter settled on October 2, 2023 for $250,000.00, again with no individual contribution from Ellen.

According to BrokerCheck, a third DFPG Investments customer alleged breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitable recommendation, material misrepresentations and omitted material information, failure to supervise, and breach of contract related to an alternative investment, claiming $500,000.00 in alleged damages in a FINRA arbitration claim (case number 21-00573) filed on March 4, 2021. BrokerCheck reports that the dispute settled on February 15, 2022 for $190,000.00, with a $0.00 individual contribution from Ellen.

According to BrokerCheck, a customer at United Planners’ Financial Services of America alleged the sale of an unsuitable and high-risk investment, specifically private placement investments on two dates, December 24, 2015, and September 15, 2016, in a FINRA arbitration claim (case number 20-02495) received on September 4, 2020. BrokerCheck reports that the customer claimed $132,396.00 in alleged damages and that the matter settled on May 20, 2022 for $150,000.00, with a $0.00 individual contribution from Ellen.

The remaining three settled disputes are older and trace back to earlier firms in Ellen’s career.

According to BrokerCheck, a civil lawsuit tied to Ellen’s time at Securities America, filed in the Superior Court of California in Orange County (case number 00282057) and served on July 9, 2009, alleged negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, misrepresentation, violations of securities law, prohibitory injunction, unlawful business practices, and conversion. BrokerCheck reports that the matter settled on April 25, 2012 for $250,000.00, with a $0.00 individual contribution from Ellen.

According to BrokerCheck, claimants in a dispute concerning variable annuity products at National Planning Corporation alleged that investments were unsuitable, illiquid, and misrepresented, and the matter became a FINRA arbitration (case number 10-01402). BrokerCheck reports that the dispute settled on December 28, 2011 for $14,999.00, with a $0.00 individual contribution from Ellen.

According to BrokerCheck, a customer tied to Ellen’s time at Royal Alliance Associates alleged misrepresentation and unsuitability for the purchase of limited partnerships and mutual funds, with alleged damages of $150,000. BrokerCheck reports that the matter went to NASD arbitration (case number 99-00705) and settled on May 1, 2000 for $53,000.00, of which Ellen personally contributed $30,300.00.

A settlement isn’t an admission of wrongdoing.

Alternative Investments

Alternative investments cover a broad group of products that do not trade on public exchanges: non-traded real estate programs, private equity, direct participation programs, limited partnership interests, and private placements sold under exemptions from full SEC registration. In our experience, they are one of the most common sources of investor-loss claims, and the reasons aren’t complicated. You often can’t sell them when you need to. Their value is hard to verify because there’s no daily market price. The fees and commissions built into them run high, and they are frequently sold to people for whom an illiquid, speculative holding was never a sensible fit.

When a broker recommends an investment, the law holds the broker to real standards. A claim for breach of fiduciary duty turns on whether the broker put the customer’s interests first. Suitability is the related question of whether the recommendation fit the customer at all. For recommendations made before June 30, 2020, FINRA Rule 2111 required a broker to have a reasonable basis for believing that a recommended transaction was suitable for the customer based on that customer’s investment profile. For recommendations made on or after that date, Regulation Best Interest (17 C.F.R. § 240.15l-1) requires a broker to act in the customer’s best interest.

Brokerage firms carry their own obligation. FINRA Rule 3110 requires a member firm to maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to catch and prevent this kind of conduct, and a failure to supervise can make the firm liable alongside the individual broker. Misrepresenting an investment or leaving out material facts also implicates FINRA Rule 2010, which requires brokers to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. The same suitability and disclosure questions apply to variable annuities, which carry surrender charges and contract features that have to be explained before a customer buys or exchanges one.

Timing matters too. FINRA Rule 12206 sets a six-year eligibility window for claims brought in arbitration, measured from the event that gave rise to the dispute. Whether a particular claim still fits inside that window depends on the facts, so an investor weighing a claim should ask a securities arbitration attorney about it sooner rather than later.

Warning Signs

If you hold alternative investments or private placements, a few questions are worth asking. Can you actually sell or redeem the investment when you want to, at a price someone will confirm? Has it grown into a large share of your overall portfolio? Did the income or distributions you were promised slow down or stop? Were you told, in plain terms, about the fees and lock-up periods before you bought? Was the product described as safe or conservative when it wasn’t? Did you learn the real risks only after your money was already committed? If any of these patterns apply to your account, a free consultation with a securities law attorney can help you understand whether you have a potential claim for damages.

Steps to Take Right Now

1. Gather your account statements, trade confirmations, and any correspondence with your broker or firm, including emails, texts, and written materials about the investments.
2. Look up your broker on FINRA BrokerCheck at brokercheck.finra.org to review their full disclosure record.
3. Contact a securities arbitration attorney for a consultation to evaluate your options.

How Rosenberger + Kawabata Can Help

Rosenberger + Kawabata represents retail investors in FINRA arbitration proceedings involving unsuitable private placement recommendations and other alternative investment losses. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a free and confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.

Sources

The information in this post comes from FINRA’s public BrokerCheck database. You can view the full detailed report (CRD# 1460478) here.