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 Negotiations
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 Negotiations
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

FINRA’s Quarterly Disciplinary Review Reminds Registered Reps of Important Duties

Posted on April 21st, 2014 at 9:00 AM

In its April, 2014 Quarterly Disciplinary Review, FINRA highlights eight types of recent disciplinary actions involving misconduct by registered representatives. Let’s examine the more important categories in terms of what concerns FINRA.

The first category relates to registered representatives who falsely provide a signature guarantee. For this category, FINRA chooses a recently settlement matter involving a registered sales assistant who falsely guaranteed the authenticity of a customer’s signature on three wire transfer requests. The sales assistant was required to obtain a written transfer request with either a notarized signature or a guaranteed signature. Moreover, the firm required the customer to sign in the presence of authorized firm personnel and to present a photo ID. Unfortunately, that procedure was not followed. Worse, it was an imposter who hacked one of the registered representative’s customers’ email accounts. The imposter then proceeded to make three transfer requests, all over email, and based upon the false representations each time by the sales assistant that firm protocol had been followed. The sales assistant received a two month suspension and a fine.

The second category relates to failure to disclose civil judgments or liens on Form U-4. FINRA selects a settle matter to emphasize the importance of disclosing in a timely manner all unsatisfied judgments and liens on the CRD (the Central Registration Depository), a database containing employment and regulatory information maintained by FINRA and state securities regulators. In that matter a registered representative obtained an unsatisfied judgment against him, and he delayed filing a U-4 amendment to the CRD for one year. Worse, he then received 3 more judgments yet failed to disclose them at all.  FINRA not only fined and suspended the registered representative for three months, but it also found the misconduct to be “willful”, which carried with it the harsh penalty of being “statutorily disqualified” from the securities industry.

The third category relates to selling away and selling securities without proper registration. FINRA focuses on a registered representative whose firm chose to prohibit private securities transactions, whether or not compensation was paid for effectuating that transaction. The rep facilitated two private sales of limited liability interests, receiving compensation, and without providing notice to or receiving prior approval from the firm.  FINRA and the registered representative entered into a settlement whereby the rep was fined and suspended for 100 days.

The fourth category relates to exercising discretion without authorization or approval. In this settled matter the rep had two customers who periodically discussed with him their account strategies and did give him verbal authorization to exercise discretion in their accounts. However, the customers did not give him written authorization, as required, and he did not provide notice to or receive prior approval from his firm, also as required. FINRA suspended the registered representative for 10 days and fined him $5,000.

The fifth category relates to forging customer names and converting customer funds. In the settled matter that FINRA discusses, the rep did those things on four occasions using bank withdrawal slips. The customer was not present, was unaware and did not authorize any withdrawals. FINRA barred the registered representative from the securities industry in all capacities.

The sixth category relates to borrowing customer funds without approval. FINRA highlights several issues with this category. First, firms typically prohibit a registered representative from borrowing money from customers. In this settled matter, the rep did so. Subsequently, the rep borrowed money from non-customer creditors. FINRA found reporting violations when the rep negotiated those debt payments yet failed to update his Form U-4 to reflect that “compromise for the forgiveness of outstanding debt.” When the rep added icing to the cake by providing “inaccurate testimony” to FINRA, the sanctions were harsh: a 2 year suspension and a fine.

Finally, a seventh category can be described as cooperation with the regulators. Specifically, FINRA discusses a settled case involving a rep’s failure to appear to provide “On The Record” testimony (an “OTR”) as well as another settled matter involving a rep’s refusal to respond to FINRA’s requests for information. Perhaps no surprise, in each instance the reps were barred from the securities industry in all capacities. 

Those examples highlight FINRA’s regulatory concerns. In each quarterly review, FINRA attempts to send a message in order to deter reps from similar misconduct. That reading is worthwhile!

Related Attorneys: James J. Eccleston

Tags:

Share

Return to Archive

Latest Articles
Advisor Barred for Failing To Comply with FINRA Enforcement Requests
April 9th, 2021 at 10:29 AM
Interactive Brokers and Schwab Plan to Fight $4.6 Million Arbitration Award
April 8th, 2021 at 2:30 PM
Read More »
Latest News
Affidavit of Merit Received in Eccleston Law’s $25 Million Legal Malpractice Action
April 1st, 2021 at 9:36 AM
Jim Eccleston Awarded Prestigious Recognition
February 26th, 2021 at 9:13 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.