Eccleston Law: For Investors. For Advisors
About
Who We Are
Testimonials
Disclaimers
Attorneys
For Advisors
Broker Transition
Transition Negotiations
Employment Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
FINRA Matters
Promissory Note Matters
Team/Parnership Disputes
CFP Board Matters
FINRA Enforcement Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
Transition Contract Review
Broker Litigation & Arbitration
Employment Matters
Regulatory Matters
Strategic Consulting
Whistleblower Law
Promissory Note Matters
Compliance Protection
Lawyer Referral Network
Expungement of CRD/BrokerCheck Disclosures
For Investors
Securities Fraud
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Negligent Investment Management
Unauthorized Trading
Lawyer Referral Network
News & Articles
News
Articles
Financial Counsel Blog
Videos
Newsletter Signup
Contact
Site Menu
About
Who We Are
Testimonials
Disclaimers
Attorneys
For Advisors
For Advisors: Overview
Broker Transition
Broker Transition Overview
Transition Negotiations
Employment Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
FINRA Matters
Promissory Note Matters
Team/Parnership Disputes
CFP Board Matters
FINRA Enforcement Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
Transition Contract Review
Broker Litigation & Arbitration
Employment Matters
Regulatory Matters
Strategic Consulting
Whistleblower Law
Promissory Note Matters
Compliance Protection
Lawyer Referral Network
Expungement of CRD/BrokerCheck Disclosures
For Investors
For Investors: Overview
Securities Fraud
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Negligent Investment Management
Unauthorized Trading
Lawyer Referral Network
News & Articles
News
Articles
Financial Counsel Blog
Videos
Newsletter Signup
Contact

(D) Duty to Adhere to the Investment Policies

Posted on October 16th, 2012 at 10:03 AM

An adviser may not manage a client’s money in a way that subjects the investment to greater risks than those described in the investment company’s registration statement, resulting in losses to shareholders. Similarly, an adviser is liable for investing a nonfund client’s money in a manner that exposes the client to greater risks than the client would reasonably expect and that causes the client substantial losses. For example, if the adviser invests the fund’s assets in a risky manner that is either specifically prohibited by or inconsistent with the fund’s registration statement-e.g. investing in risky derivatives without attempting to hedge the risk with offsetting position-then the adviser is liable. An adviser to a bond fund is also liable for investing its assets to achieve capital gains from changes in interest rates even though the investment company’s investment objectives do not involve capital appreciation and the company’s investment policies do not expressly permit and or disclose that the company intends to seek capital gains. Similarly, an adviser may not manage clients’ portfolios contrary to the way that disclosed to clients.

 

164 Strong/Corneliuson Capital Management Inc. IA-1425 (July 12, 1994); Chancellor Capital Management, IA-1447, 57 SEC Docket 2204 (Oct 18, 1994).

 

(C) Duty to Monitor

                In the opinion of the SEC, an adviser must inform clients who purchased a security on the basis of a recommendation of any material changes that come to the attention of the adviser that would have altered the earlier recommendation66

 

66 SEC Policy Statement on Future Structure of Securities Markets, CCH Fed. Sec. L. Rep., Special Rep. No. 409, 35-36 (1972).

An adviser with discretionary authority must

(1)    Manage the account in a manner directly comporting with the needs and objectives of the customer as stated in the authorization papers or as apparent from the customer’s investment and trading history; (2) keep informed regarding the changes in the market which affect his customer’s interest and act responsively to protect those interests; (3) keep his customer informed as to each completed transaction; and (4) explain forthrightly the practical impact and potential risks of the course of dealing in which the broker is engaged.67

 

 

67 Lieb v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. 461 F. Supp. 951, 953 (E.D. Mich. 1978) aff’d mem., 647 F. 2d 165 (6th Cir. 1981) (multiple citations omitted).

Tags:

Share

Return to Archive

Latest Articles
Best-Performing Energy Funds Suffered 10-Year Losses
March 1st, 2021 at 12:51 PM
Some Brokers Sold GPB Private Placements Allegedly with the Worst Wall Street Tactics
February 26th, 2021 at 1:32 PM
Read More »
Latest News
CFP Board is the New Sheriff and it Is Not Your Friend
October 24th, 2020 at 10:04 AM
Defending Against a Customer Complaint First Requires Selecting Correct Legal Counsel
October 15th, 2020 at 10:02 AM
Read More »
Share

Request a Free Consultation

Attorneys are standing by during regular business hours. Call us now for immediate service, or complete the form below and we will contact you as soon as possible.

Your E-mail Address:
 
Chicago
55 West Monroe St.
Suite 610
Chicago, Illinois 60603
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
New York City
One Liberty Plaza
165 Broadway, 23rd Floor
New York, New York 10006
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
Boca Raton
2255 Glades Road
Suite 324A
Boca Raton, Florida 33431
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
2021 © Eccleston Law, LLC.
All Rights Reserved.
The law is continuously changing. Please do not rely on information found on this site without consulting a lawyer to determine if any recent changes in the law may have an impact.