In today’s modern and highly interconnected society, trust serves as a vital pillar that upholds the fabric of our relationships and interactions. Consequently, the discovery of individuals who exploit and deceive others through fraudulent means is undeniably disheartening. One such person who has recently been exposed for his true intentions and actions is Philip Anthony Simone. In his wake, Simone has left a trail of victims who have suffered greatly as a result of his deceptive practices. The primary objective of this article is to shed light on the cunning strategies employed by Simone, as well as the far-reaching consequences they have inflicted upon the community.
I. Introduction
A. Overview of Philip Anthony Simone
Philip Anthony Simone, known for his charismatic personality and seemingly successful ventures, portrayed himself as an influential figure within various industries. He presented an image of expertise and trustworthiness, attracting unsuspecting individuals who sought his guidance, mentorship, or investment opportunities.
B. Brief summary of the deception
However, as the saying goes, appearances can be deceiving. Simone’s true intentions were far from honorable. Behind the facade of success and expertise, he engaged in deceptive practices that resulted in significant harm to those who placed their trust in him. Let us delve deeper into the background of Philip Anthony Simone to understand how this deception unfolded.
II. Background of Philip Anthony Simone
A. Early life and education
Philip Anthony Simone’s upbringing and education played a role in shaping his persona. Born into a middle-class family, he displayed early signs of ambition and charm. His educational achievements further bolstered his credibility, leading others to perceive him as a trustworthy and knowledgeable individual.
B. Career and achievements
Simone’s professional journey seemed impressive at first glance. He established several companies, claiming to specialize in various sectors such as finance, real estate, and technology. These endeavors garnered attention and admiration from peers and the wider community, further solidifying his image as a successful entrepreneur.
III. Unveiling the Deception
A. Initial suspicions
The first cracks in Simone’s carefully crafted facade began to appear when some individuals noticed inconsistencies and discrepancies in his claims. Unanswered questions and unverifiable information raised suspicions among a small circle of skeptics, prompting them to investigate further.
B. Gathering evidence
As suspicions grew, those affected by Simone’s deceptive practices banded together to gather evidence against him. They shared stories of financial losses, broken promises, and shattered dreams, building a compelling case that exposed Simone’s true intentions. Through meticulous research and collaboration, they amassed a substantial amount of evidence.
Activity(s) Reported – Philip Anthony Simone
Simone Borrowed Funds from Two of His Firm Customers
In adherence to FINRA Rule 3240(a), registered representatives face strict restrictions when it comes to borrowing or lending money to their customers. The rule specifies that such transactions are only permissible if their employing member firm has established written procedures allowing such arrangements, and the specific circumstances outlined in the rule are met. Moreover, FINRA Rule 3240(b) requires registered representatives to seek and receive prior written approval from their employing member firm, unless alternate provisions are stated in the firm’s procedures.
Aligned with the principles of commercial honor and just trade set forth in FINRA Rule 2010, associated persons are expected to uphold high standards. A violation of FINRA Rule 3240 is considered a breach of FINRA Rule 2010 as well.
During the relevant period, AXA, through its written supervisory procedures (WSPs), explicitly prohibited its registered representatives from borrowing funds from Finn customers.
From July 2017 to February 2019, Philip Anthony Simone, who had no immediate family relation to the customers, obtained six loans totaling $43,000 from customer A and two loans amounting to $90,000 from customer B. Both customers were approximately 71 years old at the time of the initial loans.
Although the loans received from customer A were not formally documented in writing, customer A understood that the borrowed funds would be fully repaid within one year, along with an additional 12% interest. On the other hand, the loans from customer B were supported by two promissory notes, dated December 20, 2018, and February 13, 2019, respectively. These promissory notes, signed by both customer B and Simone, clearly stipulated a full repayment of the loan, inclusive of 15% interest, within a 120-day period. Simone successfully repaid customer B, along with the interest, by July 2020, while approximately $8,000 had been reimbursed to customer A by October 2020.
Despite being aware of AXA’s prohibition on borrowing funds from firm customers, Simone failed to disclose the loans or obtain prior approval from AXA. Furthermore, he provided false information on two compliance questionnaires, denying any borrowing of funds from clients. Additionally, Simone misled customer A by making false statements to secure an extension for loan repayment.
By borrowing a total of $133,000 from his two elderly firm customers without notifying AXA or obtaining written approval, Philip Anthony Simone violated both FINRA Rule 3240 and FINRA Rule 2010.
Penalties And Sanctions
The fine imposed on the individual shall become due and payable either immediately upon their reassociation with a member firm or prior to submitting any application or request for relief from any statutory disqualification resulting from this event or any other proceeding, depending on which occurs earlier.
To comply with the enforcement action, the respondent is required to provide satisfactory proof of payment for restitution and prejudgment interest. The proof should clearly state the date and amount of each payment made to Customer A. This evidence must be submitted via email to [email protected]. The email should include the respondent’s identification, the case number, and a copy of the check, money order, or other payment method. The submission of this proof must be completed no later than 60 days after receiving the notice of acceptance of the Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC).
In the event that the respondent is unable to locate Customer A within 60 days after receiving the notice of acceptance of the AWC, despite making reasonable and documented efforts, the undistributed restitution, and interest must be forwarded to the appropriate state authority responsible for escheat, unclaimed property, or abandoned property funds in the state where the customer was last known to have resided. The respondent is required to provide satisfactory proof of taking this action to FINRA, following the same submission process mentioned earlier, within 14 calendar days of forwarding the undistributed restitution and interest to the relevant state authority.
Lessons Learned and Precautions
A. Recognizing red flags
Simone’s case serves as a stark reminder to remain vigilant and to recognize the red flags of deception. Lessons can be learned from the patterns and tactics employed by fraudsters like Simone. By cultivating a healthy skepticism and conducting due diligence, individuals can protect themselves from falling victim to similar scams in the future.
B. Verifying credentials
One crucial precautionary measure is to verify the credentials and claims of individuals who present themselves as experts or industry leaders. Independent research, background checks, and seeking testimonials from credible sources can help separate genuine professionals from deceptive fraudsters.
C. Building a support network
Creating a support network within communities and industries can be instrumental in mitigating the impact of deception. By sharing experiences, warnings, and information, individuals can collectively protect themselves and support those affected by fraud. Unity and collaboration are powerful tools in the fight against deceptive practices.
Conclusion
Philip Anthony Simone’s exposure as a deceptive fraudster serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of skepticism, due diligence, and community support. The devastating consequences of his actions on individuals and communities cannot be understated. However, through unity, resilience, and a commitment to rebuilding trust, affected individuals can begin to heal and move forward.
