What does our research say about Erin Scannell?

Erin Scannell, a financial advisor at Morgan Stanley, presents a polished professional image, backed by years in the industry and a reputable firm. However, a closer look at his FINRA BrokerCheck profile reveals a troubling disclosure—a customer dispute over allegedly unsuitable investment advice—that raises concerns about his judgment, risk communication, and adherence to fiduciary standards.

Unsuitable Advice
Between 2020 and 2021, Erin Scannell allegedly recommended a portfolio dominated by high-risk technology stocks to a client who explicitly sought conservative, income-generating investments due to their nearing retirement. This stark mismatch between the client’s objectives and Scannell’s recommendations points to a possible failure in understanding—or respecting—the client’s financial goals. Such a lapse calls into question his ability to deliver personalized, responsible advice.

Risk Misrepresentation
The client claimed Scannell failed to adequately disclose the volatility and downside risks associated with the tech-heavy portfolio. Without full transparency, clients are unable to make informed decisions about their financial future. For an advisor, withholding or downplaying potential losses undermines trust and violates the core responsibility to act in a client’s best interest.

Significant Client Losses
The alleged unsuitable strategy led to a reported $150,000 loss as tech stocks faltered during a period of market volatility. For a client approaching retirement, this loss could have long-term consequences on financial security. The scale of the damage amplifies the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, raising red flags about Scannell’s approach to risk management.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty
The client accused Scannell of breaching his fiduciary duty by placing them in investments that did not align with their needs or risk tolerance. Fiduciary responsibility is the cornerstone of financial advising—any deviation from this principle suggests potential negligence or self-interest, both of which compromise the advisor-client relationship.

Dispute Settlement Raises Eyebrows
The matter was settled in 2023 for $80,000, less than the $200,000 in damages originally sought. While Morgan Stanley admitted no fault—a standard legal move—the decision to settle indicates merit to the client’s claims and a desire to avoid further reputational damage. Settlements often reflect risk mitigation rather than full exoneration.

Erin Scannell’s record may not be riddled with infractions, but this customer dispute reveals weaknesses in risk alignment, transparency, and suitability—core elements of responsible financial advising. Though resolved, the incident highlights concerns about his reliability, especially for conservative investors seeking secure guidance in volatile markets.