Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQ)

You may be able to pursue a claim if your losses were caused by unsuitable advice, advisor misconduct, negligence, misrepresentation, or a failure to properly explain the risks. Losing money in the market does not automatically mean you have a legal claim. But if the recommendation did not match your goals, age, income needs, risk tolerance, or financial situation, the loss may deserve closer review.

A loss may deserve legal review if the investment was too risky for you, poorly explained, concentrated in a way you did not understand, or inconsistent with your stated objectives. Other warning signs include unexplained trading, pressure to invest, promises that seemed too certain, or recommendations that only made sense for the advisor or firm.

Unsuitable investment advice happens when an advisor recommends investments that do not properly fit the client. This may involve your age, financial goals, risk tolerance, income needs, time horizon, investment knowledge, or overall financial situation.For example, a retired investor who needs stable income may have a very different suitability profile than a younger investor with a long time horizon and higher risk tolerance.

That may be worth reviewing. Many investments carry some level of risk, but those risks should be explained clearly before you invest. If your advisor described an investment as safe, conservative, guaranteed, or low-risk when it was actually complex, speculative, or volatile, that may raise questions about whether you were properly informed.

Potential claims may involve mutual funds, ETFs, stocks, options trading, segregated funds, private placements, exempt market products, high-risk investment products, or even newer digital or crypto-related assets. The key question is not just what the investment was, but whether it was suitable for you and whether the risks were clearly explained.

Warning signs may include unauthorized trades, excessive trading, pressure to move money quickly, unexplained losses, missing documents, unclear fees, unsuitable recommendations, misleading statements, or advice that seemed to benefit the advisor more than you.You do not need to know the exact legal issue before calling. If the facts feel wrong or the explanation does not make sense, that may be enough reason to ask for a review.

Usually, no. Markets go up and down, and not every loss is caused by misconduct. A stronger concern arises when the loss appears connected to bad advice, unsuitable investments, unclear risk disclosure, unauthorized activity, or a recommendation that did not match your financial situation.

Your initial consultation with Geller Law is free and confidential. During that first call, the goal is to understand the basic facts of your situation and determine whether your concern may deserve further legal review.If your case requires a more detailed financial analysis, forensic portfolio review, or formal file assessment, any potential review costs, retainers, or contingency fee options will be explained before you decide how to proceed. The goal is simple: no hidden fees and no financial surprises.

The free consultation is an initial conversation about what happened, what kind of loss or dispute you are dealing with, and whether the facts suggest a possible legal claim.You do not need to have everything perfectly organized before calling. It is helpful to have basic details ready, such as the type of investment, the advisor or firm involved, the approximate amount lost, and any key documents or emails you already have.

No. Geller Law will explain the next steps before any legal fees or review costs are incurred.Some situations can be assessed at a high level during the initial consultation. More complex cases may require a deeper review of account records, investment history, risk documents, advisor communications, or firm responses. If that kind of review is needed, the costs and options will be discussed clearly in advance.

Yes. Geller Law reviews appropriate cases for possible contingency fee arrangements, sometimes referred to as “no win, no fee” structures. Under a contingency fee agreement, legal fees are typically paid as a percentage of the financial recovery, rather than as ongoing hourly fees. Not every case will qualify for a contingency arrangement. That decision usually depends on the strength of the claim, the amount of the loss, the evidence available, and the likely path to recovery.

A contingency fee means the lawyer’s fee is tied to the outcome of the case. Instead of paying hourly legal fees throughout the process, the legal fee is usually calculated as a percentage of the amount recovered.This can reduce the upfront financial burden for clients, especially after a serious investment loss or financial dispute. If a contingency fee is available, the terms will be explained before you agree to move forward.

You can start with whatever documents you already have. Useful materials may include:
‍
Investment account statements
New account or risk profile forms
Emails or letters from your advisor or firm
Notes from meetings or phone calls
Complaint letters or firm responses
Insurance policy documents, if relevant
Any documents showing the amount lost

You do not need to know which documents matter before contacting Geller Law. Part of the review process is helping identify what is relevant.

That is common. Many clients do not have a complete file when they first reach out.A legal review can help determine what documents may be needed, where gaps exist, and whether additional records should be requested from the advisor, dealer, insurer, or financial institution.

Geller Law looks at several factors, including the nature of the financial loss, the type of advice or conduct involved, the available documents, the amount at stake, the timeline, and whether there is evidence that the loss may have been caused by negligence, misconduct, unsuitable advice, or improper disclosure.The first step is not to prove the entire case. The first step is to determine whether the facts deserve closer review.

Yes. In most Canadian provinces outside Quebec, there is generally a two-year limitation period to start a civil claim for financial loss, negligence, or financial advisor misconduct.The deadline often starts when you discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that you suffered a loss connected to possible bad advice, unsuitable investments, fraud, or advisor misconduct that caused your loss of capital or loss of opportunity. Because the exact date can be complicated, it is better to ask for a review early rather than wait.

No. Filing a complaint with your advisor, bank, investment firm, dealer, or an ombudsman process does not necessarily stop the two-year limitation clock.This is important because internal reviews can take months. During that time, your legal deadline may still be running. If you believe you may have a claim, it is wise to get legal advice before relying only on an internal complaint process.

The two-year period usually starts when you knew, or reasonably should have known, that you suffered a loss and that the loss may have been caused by someone else’s advice, conduct, or failure to act properly.This is sometimes called “discoverability.” In investment loss cases, the date is not always obvious. A loss may happen before the investor understands that bad advice, unsuitable risk, missing disclosure, or misconduct may have played a role.

Yes. Geller Law represents clients across Canada, excluding Quebec. Many investment loss, advisor misconduct, insurance dispute, and financial abuse matters can be handled remotely through phone calls, video meetings, secure document sharing, and digital communication. You do not need to live in Ottawa or physically visit the office to request a case review.

No. Geller Law serves clients across Canada, excluding Quebec.If your matter is connected to Quebec law, Quebec courts, or a Quebec-based claim, you may need to speak with a lawyer licensed and practicing in Quebec.

CIRO is the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization. It oversees investment dealers, mutual fund dealers, and their representatives in Canada.In an investment loss claim, CIRO rules and standards may help identify whether an advisor or firm failed to meet expected obligations around suitability, disclosure, supervision, documentation, or client handling. A legal review may look at whether those standards were followed.

The OSC is the Ontario Securities Commission. It is Ontario’s securities regulator and plays a role in overseeing Ontario’s capital markets.Depending on the facts of your situation, regulatory standards, complaint history, advisor conduct, or firm obligations may be relevant to understanding whether your financial loss deserves legal review.

It is often wise to speak with a lawyer before relying only on a regulatory or internal complaint process.A lawyer can help you understand whether your issue is only a complaint, whether it may also support a civil claim, what documents matter, and whether any limitation period is already running. This is important because filing a complaint with a bank, investment firm, dealer, or regulator may not stop the legal deadline from continuing to run.This can help you avoid spending months in a complaint process only to discover later that your legal options have become harder to pursue.

Yes. Executors and estate trustees may have the authority to pursue claims on behalf of an estate if they discover that a deceased person may have been harmed by elder financial abuse, unauthorized trading, unsuitable investment advice, or advisor misconduct.This can include reviewing past investment records, advisor communications, account activity, and financial decisions that may have reduced the value of the estate.

Elder financial abuse can happen when an older or vulnerable person is pressured, misled, manipulated, or financially exploited. This may involve family members, caregivers, advisors, financial institutions, or other people in a position of trust.Warning signs may include unexplained withdrawals, sudden changes to investments, unusual transfers, missing money, pressure to sign documents, or financial decisions that do not seem to match the person’s needs or wishes.

Start by gathering whatever information you can access legally and appropriately. This may include account statements, bank records, investment documents, insurance policies, correspondence, powers of attorney, estate documents, or notes about concerning conversations.You do not need to know exactly what happened before asking for help. A legal review can help identify whether the concern may involve financial abuse, advisor misconduct, unsuitable advice, or another issue worth investigating.

Yes. Geller Law reviews life insurance matters where a claim has been denied, delayed, disputed, or where there are concerns about how the policy was sold, explained, or handled.These cases may involve questions about disclosure, policy terms, beneficiary issues, advisor conduct, or whether the insurer’s decision should be challenged.

A denied life insurance claim may deserve legal review, especially if the denial seems unfair, unclear, or inconsistent with what the policyholder or beneficiary understood.Before assuming the insurer’s decision is final, it may be worth reviewing the policy, application, medical or financial disclosure, advisor communications, and the insurer’s explanation for the denial.

Yes, it can. If an insurance advisor recommended an unsuitable policy, failed to explain key exclusions, gave misleading information, or sold coverage that did not match the client’s needs, that advice may deserve review.The issue is not only whether the claim was denied. The issue may also be whether the client understood what they were buying and whether the recommendation was appropriate.

That may be a serious warning sign. Pressure, urgency, confusion, secrecy, or reliance on someone in a position of trust can all raise concerns.If the person was older, vulnerable, grieving, ill, isolated, or dependent on the person giving advice, the situation may deserve a closer legal review.

No. You do not need to have the full case proven before reaching out.Many people contact Geller Law because something does not feel right, but they are not sure what happened. The first step is to review the basic facts, identify what documents may matter, and determine whether the concern deserves further investigation.

Private equity, private placements, exempt market products, prospectus-exempt securities, and alternative investments are terms often used to describe investments that are sold outside the regular public market system. These products may be offered to accredited investors or other investors under securities exemptions.

They can involve higher risks, limited disclosure, complex structures, and restricted liquidity. The key legal question is whether the investment was suitable for you, whether the risks were properly explained, and whether your advisor or dealer met their obligations before recommending it.

If an investment is gated, locked up, suspended, or frozen, it usually means investors cannot access some or all of their money when they want to redeem. This can happen with private equity, exempt market products, private placements, real estate funds, mortgage investment products, or other illiquid investments.

These restrictions may be disclosed in the investment documents, but that does not automatically mean the investment was suitable. If your advisor failed to explain the liquidity risk, minimized the chance of redemptions being frozen, or recommended the product despite your need for access to funds, the situation may deserve legal review.

An accredited investor is someone who meets certain income, asset, or financial thresholds under securities rules. Some private placements, exempt market securities, and alternative investments are sold using the accredited investor exemption.

Being classified as an accredited investor does not mean every high-risk or illiquid investment is suitable for you. Advisors and dealers may still have obligations to understand your financial situation, risk tolerance, investment objectives, time horizon, liquidity needs, and whether the product was appropriate for you.

Not every financial advisor automatically owes a fiduciary duty in every situation. However, courts may look at factors such as trust, reliance, vulnerability, discretion, the length of the advisor-client relationship, conflicts of interest, and the advisor’s professional obligations.

Even where a fiduciary duty is disputed, advisors and dealers may still owe important duties related to suitability, disclosure, conflicts of interest, supervision, and acting fairly, honestly, and in good faith.

It is often wise to speak with a lawyer before relying only on the OBSI process or an internal complaint process. OBSI may be helpful in some cases, but it is not the same as a civil lawsuit, and using a complaint process may not stop a legal limitation period from running.

A lawyer can help you understand whether your complaint may also support a legal claim, what documents matter, whether your deadline is approaching, and whether the complaint process could affect your recovery strategy.

Some advisors and dealers only offer a limited range of investment or insurance products. This may include proprietary funds, exempt market products, private placements, Universal Life insurance, segregated funds, or other products available through that firm.

A limited product shelf is not automatically improper. But it may raise concerns if the advisor presented the recommendation as independent, comprehensive advice when they were mainly selling what their firm made available or what generated compensation. If the product was unsuitable, poorly explained, high-risk, illiquid, or more expensive than reasonable alternatives, the recommendation may deserve legal review.