Landolt Securities, Inc. Review: Complaints, Lawsuits, and GWG L Bond Sales
Investors who suffered losses in GWG L Bonds may have potential claims against the brokerage firms that recommended these high-risk investments. Recent regulatory actions involving Landolt Securities, Inc. (CRD #28352) raise serious concerns about supervision failures, unsuitable recommendations, and possible investor harm.
The securities attorneys at The White Law Group are actively investigating claims involving Landolt Securities complaints, lawsuits, and GWG L Bond losses. If you have suffered losses with Landolt Securities you may be able to file a FINRA arbitration claim for recovery.
Texas Sanctions Landolt Securities Over GWG L Bond Sales
In April 2026, the Texas State Securities Board issued a disciplinary order against Landolt Securities, Inc. related to its sale of GWG Holdings L Bonds to investors.
According to the order:
- Landolt Securities agreed to:
- A $10,000 fine
- A formal reprimand
- Two registered representatives were also sanctioned
- Certain clients are expected to receive refunds
The investigation reportedly stemmed from a customer complaint filed in January 2025, highlighting potential misconduct tied to L Bond recommendations.
Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
Regulators found that Landolt Securities failed to properly supervise sales of these complex, high-risk products:
- Investors allegedly placed 24% to 29% of their net worth into GWG L Bonds
- This exceeded the firm’s internal concentration limit of 15%
- Some investors were reportedly above the firm’s age threshold
- Client documentation was described as incomplete or inconsistent
The regulator stated:
“The monitoring systems this firm had in place were insufficient to detect unsuitable sales of high-risk investments.”
These findings raise red flags about failure to supervise and whether investors were exposed to risks they did not fully understand.
What Are GWG L Bonds?
GWG L Bonds were high-yield, illiquid debt securities issued by GWG Holdings, Inc..
These investments were marketed as income-producing alternatives, offering interest rates between 5.50% and 8.50%, but carried significant risks:
- Unrated and speculative
- Illiquid (limited ability to sell)
- Exposure to complex alternative assets
- Risk of total loss of principal
In 2022, GWG Holdings filed for bankruptcy following the collapse of its business model, leaving many investors with substantial losses.
Approximately $1.6 billion of these bonds were sold by dozens of broker-dealers nationwide.
Tony Liddle: Fraud Allegations and Regulatory Bars
Investor concerns involving Landolt Securities are further compounded by the conduct of former broker Anthony “Tony” Liddle (CRD #5478479).
SEC Bar and Criminal Conviction
In 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission barred Tony Liddle after he pleaded guilty to wire fraud and related charges.
- Sentenced to 97 months in prison
- Ordered to pay over $1.6 million in restitution
- Additional restitution may be imposed
Allegations of Misappropriation
Regulators allege that between 2016 and 2022, Liddle:
- Misused client funds for personal expenses
- Used new investor funds to pay earlier investors (Ponzi-like activity)
- Diverted funds intended for investments, including GWG L Bonds
The Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions permanently barred him from the securities industry.
FINRA Bar and Customer Complaints
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority also barred Liddle in 2022 after he refused to cooperate with an investigation.
According to public records:
- Liddle allegedly borrowed or misappropriated over $1.8 million
- He has multiple customer complaints pending
- Allegations include theft and fraud
Failure to Supervise: Potential Liability for Brokerage Firms
Brokerage firms like Landolt Securities have a legal obligation to supervise their financial advisors under FINRA Rule 3110.
Failure to do so may expose firms to liability when:
- Unsuitable investments are recommended
- Red flags are ignored
- Customer complaints are not properly investigated
- High-risk products are overconcentrated in client portfolios
The findings in the Texas action suggest that supervisory systems at Landolt Securities may have been inadequate to protect investors.
Can Investors File Lawsuits or FINRA Arbitration Claims?
Investors who suffered losses in GWG L Bonds or through brokers like Tony Liddle may be able to pursue recovery through FINRA arbitration claims, including for:
- Unsuitable investment recommendations
- Misrepresentation or omission of risks
- Overconcentration in speculative products
- Failure to supervise
- Fraud or misappropriation
Unlike class actions, FINRA arbitration allows investors to bring individual claims directly against brokerage firms.
Landolt Securities Complaints and Investor Recovery Options
If you invested with Landolt Securities, Inc. or worked with Anthony “Tony” Liddle and experienced losses, you may have legal options.
The White Law Group is investigating:
- Landolt Securities complaints
- GWG L Bond losses
- Failure to supervise claims
- Potential securities fraud and misconduct
Speak With a Securities Fraud Attorney
The White Law Group is a national securities fraud law firm with offices in Chicago and Seattle. Our attorneys represent investors in FINRA arbitration and securities lawsuits nationwide and have recovered millions for clients.
If you have concerns about GWG L Bonds or Landolt Securities, contact us today for a free consultation at 888-637-5510.
FAQs About Landolt Securities and GWG L Bond Claims
What is the Landolt Securities lawsuit about?
The firm has been sanctioned by regulators for alleged supervision failures and unsuitable recommendations involving GWG L Bonds. Investors may pursue claims through FINRA arbitration rather than traditional lawsuits.
Can I recover GWG L Bond losses?
Potentially, yes. Investors may be able to recover losses if their broker recommended unsuitable investments or failed to disclose risks.
What are common complaints against Landolt Securities?
Complaints may include unsuitable investment recommendations, overconcentration in high-risk products, and failure to supervise brokers.
