ChapmanAlbin has filed a FINRA arbitration claim against The Leaders Group, Inc. and registered representative Neil D. Hance (CRD 6207150) on behalf of an investor who alleges she suffered significant losses after following Hance’s recommendations. The pending claim alleges misconduct involving an annuity exchange, promissory notes, a restaurant-related private investment, and a real estate-related loan opportunity. Based on public records including FINRA BrokerCheck, along with claim materials reviewed by ChapmanAlbin, Hance is currently associated with The Leaders Group. This page summarizes the allegations in plain English and explains what other investors may want to review if they invested with Hance or The Leaders Group.
Neil D. Hance
May 27, 2026
Talk to an investment fraud attorney
Confidential, no-cost case review. We represent investors nationwide.
Broker Snapshot
| Broker Name | Neil Hance |
| CRD # | 6207150 |
| Current case posture | ChapmanAlbin has filed a FINRA arbitration claim involving Hance and The Leaders Group on behalf of an investor. |
| Current firm listed in BrokerCheck | The Leaders Group, Inc. (CRD 37157), Summit, New Jersey |
| Primary concern | Early-stage allegations involving promissory notes, private deals, an annuity exchange, and possible activity outside ordinary firm supervision. |
| Products or strategies mentioned | Promissory notes, private placements/private deals, restaurant-related investment, real estate-related loan opportunity, and annuity exchange. |
| Potential investor claim themes | Selling away, misrepresentation and omission, unsuitable recommendations, failure to supervise, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and Regulation Best Interest issues. |
Further Details
Pending FINRA arbitration claim against The Leaders Group and Neil Hance
The central issue is the FINRA arbitration claim ChapmanAlbin filed against The Leaders Group, Inc. and Hance. According to the claim materials, the investor worked with Hance as her financial advisor and followed recommendations that allegedly led to losses through an annuity exchange, a promissory note, and a separate real estate-related lending opportunity. These allegations have not been proven, and the arbitration process will depend on the specific evidence developed in the case.
Alleged annuity exchange concerns
The claim alleges that Hance recommended that the investor liquidate an existing fixed annuity and purchase a new annuity through a 1035 exchange. The alleged harm includes approximately $15,000 in surrender charges. For investors, the practical question is whether the costs, surrender schedule, liquidity limits, tax consequences, and purpose of the exchange were clearly explained before the transaction occurred.
Promissory notes, private deals, and selling away
The claim also describes an alleged $60,000 promissory note tied to a restaurant-related investment and a separate alleged $150,000 real estate-related loan opportunity. These allegations raise potential selling away concerns because investors may have been asked to move money outside normal brokerage channels or into transactions that did not appear on regular account statements. Private notes and private placements can carry serious risks when the issuer, repayment source, conflicts, compensation, and firm approval status are not fully disclosed.
Firm supervision issues
Brokerage firms generally have a duty to supervise registered representatives, including outside business activities and private securities transactions where applicable. The claim alleges that The Leaders Group failed to adequately supervise Hance’s investment-related activities, outside business activities, and private securities transactions. These allegations may support a failure to supervise theory depending on what the firm knew, what it approved, and what reasonable supervision should have detected.
Why these allegations matter for other investors
Selling-away and promissory-note cases are rarely limited to paperwork questions. Investors may be harmed if money is moved outside the ordinary protections of a brokerage account, if promised interest is not paid, if the project fails, or if the investor later discovers the deal was not approved or supervised by the firm. Similar issues can arise when annuity exchanges are recommended without a clear explanation of surrender charges, fees, restrictions, or the broker’s compensation.
Talk to an investment fraud attorney
Confidential, no-cost case review. We represent investors nationwide.
What investors can do and how ChapmanAlbin can help
If you worked with Neil D. Hance or The Leaders Group and were offered a promissory note, restaurant-related investment, real estate loan, private placement, annuity exchange, or other investment that did not appear on your regular brokerage statements, it may be worth having your documents reviewed. ChapmanAlbin can help investors compare what they were told with the paperwork, account statements, money movement records, and firm-supervision issues that may affect a potential FINRA arbitration claim.
Common Warning Signs
- You were asked to write a check or wire money to an individual, business, restaurant, real estate project, or other third party instead of the brokerage firm.
- The investment did not appear on your regular brokerage account statements.
- A promissory note or private deal was described as “safe,” “guaranteed,” “low risk,” or a better income opportunity than your current investments.
- You were encouraged to replace or exchange an annuity even though the transaction created surrender charges or new lock-up periods.
- The broker introduced you to a borrower, business partner, friend, client, or outside contact seeking money.
- You did not receive clear written disclosures about compensation, conflicts of interest, risks, liquidity limits, or whether the firm approved the transaction.
- Payments stopped, promised interest was not paid, or you were told to wait because a project or business was delayed.
Documents to Gather
- Brokerage account statements for the full period you worked with Hance or The Leaders Group
- Annuity contracts, 1035 exchange paperwork, replacement forms, surrender schedules, and disclosure packets
- Promissory notes, loan agreements, private placement documents, subscription documents, or offering materials
- Wire receipts, cancelled checks, ACH records, and transfer instructions
- Emails, text messages, meeting notes, handwritten notes, calendars, and call logs
- Any documents showing promised interest, projected returns, repayment terms, collateral, or guarantees
- Any account summaries or performance reports that were not issued directly by the brokerage firm
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the status of the matter involving Neil Hance and The Leaders Group?
ChapmanAlbin has filed a FINRA arbitration claim against The Leaders Group, Inc. and Neil D. Hance on behalf of an investor. The claim alleges misconduct involving an annuity exchange, a promissory note, and a real estate-related loan opportunity. The allegations are pending and have not been proven.
What is selling away?
Selling away generally refers to a broker recommending or participating in an investment outside the normal business of the brokerage firm, especially where the firm did not approve or supervise the transaction. This can include promissory notes, private placements, loans to third parties, or other private deals.
Are promissory notes always improper?
No. But promissory notes can create serious investor risks, especially when they are sold as safe or guaranteed, are tied to a private business, or do not appear on official brokerage statements. Investors should review who issued the note, whether the firm approved it, and whether the risks were explained.
What should I review if I exchanged one annuity for another?
Gather the old annuity contract, the new annuity contract, 1035 exchange paperwork, replacement forms, surrender charge schedule, and any documents showing the broker’s compensation or rationale for the exchange. The key question is whether the exchange made sense for your needs after costs, restrictions, and risks were considered.
Can a brokerage firm be responsible for a private deal?
Depending on the facts, a firm may face claims if it failed to reasonably supervise a broker’s outside business activities, private securities transactions, communications, or recommendations. The answer depends on what the firm knew or should have known and whether the investment activity fell within applicable FINRA supervision rules.

ChapmanAlbin is a nationwide securities law firm
Contact us for a free, confidential consultation.
Disclaimer
This page is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Past outcomes are not a guarantee of future results. Each matter is different and depends on its specific facts.

