FINRA bars Ex-Pruco broker who took $500k+ commissions from forged clients’ signatures

FINRA has barred former Pruco Securities broker Avinesh Shankar after regulators concluded he used electronic signature software to place clients’ names on annuity paperwork they did not authorize, triggering more than $500,000 in advanced commissions on annuities that were never funded.

The disciplinary case, filed in February, was resolved through an offer of settlement accepted under FINRA’s expedited settlement process.

Shankar agreed to the entry of findings and sanctions without admitting or denying the allegations, according to the FINRA order published on March 20.

Shankar first became registered with FINRA through an association with BBVA Securities in 2013, according to his BrokerCheck record. He later registered in October 2019 as a general securities representative and as an investment company and variable contracts products representative through Pruco.

Pruco ended his registration effective March 13, 2024, via a Form U5. The filing said Shankar was discharged for “submit[ting] numerous annuity applications containing inaccurate information and non-genuine electronic customer signatures for over 30 different customers resulting in his receipt of commissions to which he was not otherwise entitled, which were recaptured by the Company on multiple occasions.”

Read more: Finra bars broker who forged clients’ annuity switches

The core of the case centers on 115 annuity applications submitted between 2022 2024. Over that period, FINRA found Shankar signed 64 customers’ names on the applications without permission. The customers were not aware the applications were being submitted on their behalf, and none of the annuities were funded at the time of application or later, the order said.

Even so, Pruco paid advanced commissions after receiving 114 of the 115 applications. Total advanced commissions paid to Shankar came to $511,609.74, and FINRA treated those payments as converted funds because they were generated through forged paperwork.

The order lays out how the scheme worked operationally: when an annuity distributor followed up about delays in funding, Shankar gave false explanations. Meanwhile, the firm’s commission system kept pushing money out the door in advance of funding.

Once each annuity remained unfunded for 90 days, Pruco attempted to recoup the advances by deducting amounts from Shankar’s next paycheck and rolling any unpaid balance into subsequent pay periods. By the time he left the firm, Shankar owed Pruco $163,910.71 in unearned commissions tied to the annuity applications at issue.

FINRA also included customer-level examples showing a repeated pattern of violations on a large scale. One customer’s name was used on six variable annuity applications, generating $29,714.20 in advanced commissions, while another customer’s name was used on five applications, generating $20,613.30. The remaining 62 customers accounted for 104 additional annuity applications and $461,282.24 in additional advances, according to the order.

The case of Shankar's misconduct came to a head in January 2024, when the firm confronted him about some of the applications. He later admitted he had forged customer signatures “and did so to earn commissions,” the FINRA order said.

Pruco terminated him on Feb. 20, 2024.

FINRA found violations of FINRA Rule 2010 tied to both conversion and forgery. The sanction: a bar from associating with any FINRA member in any capacity.

The case around Shankar echoes a couple of less impactful episodes at Prudential over the past decade. In 2019, Karen Paek was barred from the industry over findings that she “created, signed, and submitted fictitious variable annuity applications” and “forged the individuals' electronic signatures” on the applications, with the annuities “never funded.” 

In 2016, Wade Wilson Turner was barred from the industry for making unsuitable variable annuity recommendations while employed at Prudential Financial and MetLife.