Former Wells Fargo Advisors Sue the Company Over Cross-Selling
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,839,384 (+0.39%)       Melbourne $1,112,698 (+0.31%)       Brisbane $1,239,032 (+0.41%)       Adelaide $1,124,729 (+1.41%)       Perth $1,059,750 (+0.24%)       Hobart $831,697 (-0.24%)       Darwin $874,845 (-1.71%)       Canberra $1,110,011 (-0.45%)       National Capitals $1,222,121 (+0.28%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800,472 (-0.08%)       Melbourne $528,474 (+0.36%)       Brisbane $797,670 (-0.01%)       Adelaide $584,683 (-0.37%)       Perth $605,402 (-2.05%)       Hobart $554,533 (+0.44%)       Darwin $470,544 (-1.19%)       Canberra $485,095 (+0.11%)       National Capitals $627,512 (-0.30%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 8,625 (+7)       Melbourne 10,721 (-143)       Brisbane 5,186 (-18)       Adelaide 1,693 (-41)       Perth 4,550 (-44)       Hobart 794 (+5)       Darwin 88 (-3)       Canberra 797 (-6)       National Capitals $32,454 (-243)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 6,967 (-38)       Melbourne 5,813 (-78)       Brisbane 904 (-1)       Adelaide 262 (-1)       Perth 913 (-10)       Hobart 142 (+1)       Darwin 168 (+1)       Canberra 1,055 (+2)       National Capitals $16,224 (-124)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 ($0)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $690 (+$10)       Adelaide $650 (+$8)       Perth $725 (+$15)       Hobart $595 (-$5)       Darwin $745 (-$5)       Canberra $710 ($0)       National Capitals $694 (+$3)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 (+$20)       Melbourne $590 (-$10)       Brisbane $680 (+$5)       Adelaide $550 ($0)       Perth $675 (-$5)       Hobart $495 (+$20)       Darwin $640 (+$10)       Canberra $595 ($0)       National Capitals $640 (+$5)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,782 (+459)       Melbourne 7,492 (+593)       Brisbane 4,368 (+663)       Adelaide 1,568 (+170)       Perth 2,281 (+189)       Hobart 199 (+50)       Darwin 90 (+12)       Canberra 487 (+21)       National Capitals $22,267 (+2,157)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,079 (+1,172)       Melbourne 6,743 (+1,111)       Brisbane 2,425 (+278)       Adelaide 453 (+63)       Perth 559 (+62)       Hobart 89 (+24)       Darwin 171 (+10)       Canberra 523 (-181)       National Capitals $20,042 (+2,539)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.26% (↓)       Melbourne 2.71% (↓)     Brisbane 2.90% (↑)        Adelaide 3.01% (↓)     Perth 3.56% (↑)        Hobart 3.72% (↓)     Darwin 4.43% (↑)      Canberra 3.33% (↑)      National Capitals $2.95% (↑)             UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND       Sydney 5.20% (↑)        Melbourne 5.81% (↓)     Brisbane 4.43% (↑)      Adelaide 4.89% (↑)      Perth 5.80% (↑)      Hobart 4.64% (↑)      Darwin 7.07% (↑)        Canberra 6.38% (↓)     National Capitals $5.31% (↑)             HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 1.5% (↑)      Brisbane 1.2% (↑)      Adelaide 1.2% (↑)      Perth 1.0% (↑)        Hobart 0.5% (↓)       Darwin 0.7% (↓)     Canberra 1.6% (↑)      National Capitals $1.1% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 2.4% (↑)      Brisbane 1.5% (↑)      Adelaide 0.8% (↑)      Perth 0.9% (↑)      Hobart 1.2% (↑)        Darwin 1.4% (↓)     Canberra 2.7% (↑)      National Capitals $1.5% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND       Sydney 31.4 (↑)      Melbourne 29.1 (↑)      Brisbane 29.9 (↑)      Adelaide 25.6 (↑)        Perth 33.8 (↓)     Hobart 27.2 (↑)      Darwin 29.7 (↑)      Canberra 31.0 (↑)      National Capitals $29.7 (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND       Sydney 31.4 (↑)      Melbourne 30.9 (↑)      Brisbane 26.6 (↑)      Adelaide 24.3 (↑)        Perth 30.6 (↓)     Hobart 32.0 (↑)        Darwin 26.5 (↓)       Canberra 38.3 (↓)     National Capitals $30.1 (↑)            
Share Button

Former Wells Fargo Advisors Sue the Company Over Cross-Selling

By KENNETH CORBIN
Sat, Mar 9, 2024 6:37amGrey Clock 3 min

Two former Wells Fargo advisors are suing the firm for breach of contract, unfair business practices, and retaliation after they say they resisted pressure from their supervisors to secretly transfer sensitive client information from the advisor and brokerage side of the company to the private bank.

The advisors, Karen Keusayan and Richard Green, are also alleging that Wells Fargo improperly withheld deferred compensation after they resigned in 2021 and joined Morgan Stanley , where they are still registered.

In their complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, the advisors describe themselves as high-producing employees who were loyal to the company even through the “nightmarish” years of 2015 to 2017, when Wells Fargo’s banking division was “publicly scorned” for the fake account scandal.

“This is not the ‘sour grapes’ case of a disgruntled employee(s) who sought a promotion and did not get one,” the advisors say in their complaint. “Neither Ms. Keusayan nor Mr. Green ever wanted to leave Wells Fargo. The goal for each had always been to retire at Wells Fargo.”

Wells Fargo declined to comment on the lawsuit.

The two advisors joined forces in 2015 to form a “production partnership,” according to the complaint, which says they grew their book of business to more than $1 billion by 2020.

In 2018, Wells Fargo introduced a new element to its advisor compensation plan, according to the complaint. Advisors were expected to complete forms called client discovery reviews, or CDRs, detailing information about advisory clients. The plaintiffs say they were directed by a compliance officer to keep the forms secret from the clients themselves.

Instead, the CDRs were intended for Wells Fargo’s private bank, “not the broker-dealer/financial services side where plaintiffs worked,” according to the complaint.

They contend that advisors were pressured to work with clients to complete CDRs, which would be secretly shared with Wells Fargo private bankers who could use them as sales leads.

Before submitting the forms to count toward a quota that resulted in additional compensation, the advisors had to check three boxes stating that they had discussed the information with the client, that the information was accurate, and that they had offered the client an opportunity to obtain a copy of the document. On that last item, the plaintiffs allege that Wells Fargo essentially instructed the advisors to lie, explaining that the document didn’t belong to the advisors, but the bank, even though the information came from their own clients.

“[H]igh-ranking compliance personnel at Wells Fargo Advisors repeatedly told plaintiffs to never deliver or present the CDR to the client since, as it was explained by compliance, the CDR was a bank document,” the complaint states. “Worse, plaintiffs were told not to inform the client that a CDR had been prepared.”

The plaintiffs say that these “dishonest instructions” put them in an “impossible position” and that they soon began raising concerns with their superiors. But each time they spoke out, they were told by their supervisors to continue submitting the forms as a requisite part of the company’s compensation plan.

The complaint describes the advisors’ growing unease with being pressured to falsify the CDR submission document, as well as concerns over the personal privacy of their clients, whose information was allegedly being shared internally without their knowledge or permission.

The advisors say that their bosses undertook a retaliatory campaign against them for continuing to raise objections to the CDR program, “including by failing to provide the banking support that plaintiffs and their clients had come to expect as a benefit of being associated with a large, full-service, retail bank,” according to the complaint.

They also say that the advisors felt their jobs were at risk, offering examples of a hostile or coercive work environment. “Mr. Green was berated by a yelling supervisor in front of fellow employees, and Ms. Keusayan was informed that the bank would not issue a routine credit card to her sister (a customer) if a CDR was not on file,” according to the complaint.

The advisors say the deteriorating work environment ultimately led them to resign around July 2021, after which they were informed that they were ineligible for large sums of deferred compensation—$662,000 for Keusayan and nearly $814,000 for Green.

The advisors are seeking to recoup the deferred comp they say they are owed, and are asking the court for additional damages, as well as an injunction barring Wells Fargo from engaging in the conduct alleged in the complaint, among other relief.



MOST POPULAR

A long-standing cultural cruise and a new expedition-style offering will soon operate side by side in French Polynesia.

The pandemic-fuelled love affair with casual footwear is fading, with Bank of America warning the downturn shows no sign of easing.

Related Stories
Money
The Casual Footwear Boom Is Over. It’s Bad News for Adidas.
By SABRINA ESCOBAR 09/01/2026
Money
Five Wall Street Investors Explain How They’re Approaching the Coming Year
By JACK PITCHER 06/01/2026
Money
Capital Haus buys Baker Young in billion-dollar push to reshape Australian wealth advice
By Jeni O'Dowd 01/12/2025
The Casual Footwear Boom Is Over. It’s Bad News for Adidas.

The pandemic-fuelled love affair with casual footwear is fading, with Bank of America warning the downturn shows no sign of easing.

By SABRINA ESCOBAR
Fri, Jan 9, 2026 2 min

The boom in casual footware ushered in by the pandemic has ended, a potential problem for companies such as Adidas that benefited from the shift to less formal clothing, Bank of America says.

The casual footwear business has been on the ropes since mid-2023 as people began returning to office.

Analyst Thierry Cota wrote that while most downcycles have lasted one to two years over the past two decades or so, the current one is different.

It “shows no sign of abating” and there is “no turning point in sight,” he said.

Adidas and Nike alone account for almost 60% of revenue in the casual footwear industry, Cota estimated, so the sector’s slower growth could be especially painful for them as opposed to brands that have a stronger performance-shoe segment. Adidas may just have it worse than Nike.

Cota downgraded Adidas stock to Underperform from Buy on Tuesday and slashed his target for the stock price to €160 (about $187) from €213. He doesn’t have a rating for Nike stock.

Shares of Adidas listed on the German stock exchange fell 4.5% Tuesday to €162.25. Nike stock was down 1.2%.

Adidas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cota sees trouble for Adidas both in the short and long term.

Adidas’ lifestyle segment, which includes the Gazelles and Sambas brands, has been one of the company’s fastest-growing business, but there are signs growth is waning.

Lifestyle sales increased at a 10% annual pace in Adidas’ third quarter, down from 13% in the second quarter.

The analyst now predicts Adidas’ organic sales will grow by a 5% annual rate starting in 2027, down from his prior forecast of 7.5%.

The slower revenue growth will likewise weigh on profitability, Cota said, predicting that margins on earnings before interest and taxes will decline back toward the company’s long-term average after several quarters of outperforming. That could result in a cut to earnings per share.

Adidas stock had a rough 2025. Shares shed 33% in the past 12 months, weighed down by investor concerns over how tariffs, slowing demand, and increased competition would affect revenue growth.

Nike stock fell 9% throughout the period, reflecting both the company’s struggles with demand and optimism over a turnaround plan CEO Elliott Hill rolled out in late 2024.

Investors’ confidence has faded following Nike’s December earnings report, which suggested that a sustained recovery is still several quarters away. Just how many remains anyone’s guess.

But if Adidas’ challenges continue, as Cota believes they will, it could open up some space for Nike to claw back any market share it lost to its rival.

Investors should keep in mind, however, that the field has grown increasingly crowded in the past five years. Upstarts such as On Holding and Hoka also present a formidable challenge to the sector’s legacy brands.

Shares of On and Deckers Outdoor , Hoka’s parent company, fell 11% and 48%, respectively, in 2025, but analysts are upbeat about both companies’ fundamentals as the new year begins.

The battle of the sneakers is just getting started.

MOST POPULAR

A cluster of century-old warehouses beneath the Harbour Bridge has been transformed into a modern workplace hub, now home to more than 100 businesses.

Three completed developments bring a quieter, more thoughtful style of luxury living to Mosman, Neutral Bay and Crows Nest.

Related Stories
Lifestyle
GAC AION V ARRIVES: A NEW CHAPTER IN LUXURY ELECTRIC CARS
By Jeni O'Dowd 31/10/2025
Property
THE WORLD’S MOST EXPENSIVE AIRBNBS REVEALED & AUSTRALIA’S SURPRISE ENTRY
By Staff Writer 08/09/2025
Property
LESS SHOW, MORE SOUL: MOSAIC’S BROOK MONAHAN ON AUSTRALIAN LUXURY 
By Jeni O'Dowd 04/12/2025
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop