Last week I posted a blog about the dangers of not heeding findings made during a regulatory exam, at least findings of clear, undisputable compliance issues that cannot be meaningfully defended. Today I am writing to highlight a corollary rule: if one customer points out the existence of a real problem, again, a clear problem
Defenses
Barclays AWC Teaches Important Lessons About The Price To Pay For Not Heeding Exam Findings
By Alan Wolper on
There is no question in my mind that the quality of FINRA examiners is a bit uneven. Some are smart and insightful and helpful; others are, well, not. Most of the time, they do know what they’re talking about. That means the opportunity to make legitimate arguments against exam findings can, at least sometimes, be…
Filing A Frivolous Customer Arbitration Carries Real Monetary Risks
By Chris Seps on
Here is a very interesting piece from Chris about the fact that some customers who file arbitrations may come to learn the hard way that even when their attorney takes the case on a continency fee basis, they still have real skin the game. I also want to be clear: while the award that serves…
New Account Forms: As Evidence, They Can Be A Blessing Or A Curse
By Alan Wolper on
I am fond of saying that, at least generally speaking, the most important document in a customer arbitration alleging unsuitable recommendations is the new account form. If the NAF is in good shape, i.e., it is accurate, it is complete, it is up-to-date, it doesn’t have any changes or white-outs, then I am free to…
You Should Understand The Difference Between Violating A Firm Policy And Violating A FINRA Rule . . . Even If FINRA Doesn’t
By Alan Wolper on
I am writing this while flying home from my first business trip in over 15 months. I have to tell you, it is more than a bit of a strange feeling to be out and among people again. While my face is sore from wearing this N95 mask nearly non-stop for three days, my hands…
SEC Not Only Reverses FINRA Disciplinary Action, But Provides Blueprint For Respondents To Use In Their Defense Of Similar Claims
By Alan Wolper on
My friend and former colleague, Brian Rubin, publishes annually his analysis of FINRA Enforcement cases, spotting trends in terms of the number and types of matters it brings, the sanctions meted out, etc. It is an excellent tool, and eagerly anticipated by lots of us who practice in this industry. One of the hard parts…
I Am “Investigating” The Fact That Claimant’s Lawyers Use BrokerCheck In A Way FINRA Did Not Intend
By Alan Wolper on
I get the fact that anyone silly enough to work for a broker-dealer knowingly chooses to live in a fishbowl. Thanks to BrokerCheck, you can very easily learn more about a registered representative than you can about, say, a doctor, a teacher, a lawyer, you name it, all through a couple of mouse clicks. But,…
FINRA AWC Provides New Defense To Allegation Of “Willfulness”
By Alan Wolper on
I dare you. In fact, I double-dog dare you to figure out how or why FINRA decides to charge willfulness in some cases but not in others. Bottom line is that it is nearly impossible (except if you’re a big firm, in which case you can rest easy that FINRA will manage to skip the…
Federal Judge Rules That While Zoom Arbitrations Are “Clunkier,” They Are Not Unfair
By Alan Wolper on
Carlos Legaspy is a respondent in a FINRA arbitration that was scheduled to go to hearing in August. As with all other FINRA cases, it was subject to a sweeping administrative decision by FINRA to postpone all in-person hearings through the summer, due to the pandemic. As I have noted before, that decision imbued…
Beyond Lucia: The Supreme Court’s Decision Is Just the Beginning
By Ken Berg on
Here is an important post by my partner, Ken Berg, regarding SEC administrative proceedings, and what we can expect following the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lucia. – Alan
By now everyone knows the US Supreme Court declared the SEC’s administrative proceedings unconstitutional because the ALJs were improperly hired by the SEC staff instead of…