An irreverent Wall Street Blog
by Bill Singer
Join BrokeAndBroker blog on Facebook  Follow the BrokeAndBroker blog on Twitter  Connect with BrokeAndBroker on LinkedIn  Join Bill Singer on Google+  Subscribe to RSS Feed

FINRA Enforcement Loses Dramatic ARS Case
Written: September 4, 2012


On April 14, 2010, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (“FINRA’s”) Department of Enforcement (“Enforcement”) filed a Complaint against Respondent Richard E. Morrison (“Respondent”) asserting three cause of action:

  1. material omissions in the sale of Auction Rate Securities (“ARS”) to eight corporate clients, in violation of NASD Rule 2110 (“First Cause”);
  2. failing to disclose in late 2007/early 2008 to one of the eight corporate clients that the market for ARS was “under stress or otherwise in trouble,” in violation of NASD Rule 2110 (“Second Cause”); and
  3. failing to obtain written authorization from the eight clients for the exercise of discretion, and failing to obtain written acceptance of the accounts as discretionary from his firm, in violation of NASD Rules 2510 and 2110 (“Third Cause”).

FINRA Departtment Of Enforcement, Complainant, v. Richard E. Morrison,Respondent (FINRA Disciplinary Proceeding 2008013863702, August 28, 2012).


Respondent was one of three members of the Corporate Cash Management Group (“CCM”) at Jefferies & Co., Inc. (“Jefferies”). CCM managed the cash needs of about 40 corporate clients by investing in safe and liquid investments. Respondent’s CCM role was primarily to solicit clients and structure their portfolios; he did not select ARS for the clients or execute any trades.

The FINRA Decision characterizes the bulk of CCM’s clients as “sophisticated companies,” among which were those seeking CCM’s management of their cash needs and for which CCM exercised limited discretion by selecting investments and making the decisions on when to buy and sell, subject to the clients’ investment guidelines. The average size of the limited-discretion clients’ accounts was about $75 million.

CCM did not charge its clients for transactions or services but received most of its compensation from issuers as trailing commissions on the ARS in its clients’ accounts. When CCM bought new issue ARS, it typically received additional compensation from the underwriters in the form of discounts on the price of the ARS. CCM received a share of the discounts from Jefferies as additional compensation for the members of the group.

The FINRA Complaint alleged misconduct involving eight companies for which CCM exercised limited discretion, and of those eight, only three were Respondent’s clients – notwithstanding, Enforcement charged that Respondent had a duty to make disclosures to all eight limited-discretion clients because of the close working relationship among the members of the CCM team.

First Cause Dismissed

In dismissing the First Cause, the FINRA Extended Hearing Panel found that Respondent had, in fact,  disclosed to his clients that CCM would purchase new issue securities and receive additional compensation – moreover, the Panel deemed such disclosures as not material under the circumstances of the client relationships because, among other considerations:

  • the new issue securities satisfied the clients’ investment guidelines,
  • any yield differences would be eliminated at the next auction, and
  • CCM could not share in the new issue discount.

Further the Panel found that Enforcement failed to prove that there were comparable or similar ARS with a higher yield.  As to the non-disclosure of CCM’s practice of engaging in cross trades among clients, the Panel found that this was not a material factor and the crossing of trades actually benefited clients.

Second Cause Dismissed

In dismissing the Second Cause, which related only to a single limited-discretion client, the Panel found that Respondent did not believe that the market was in trouble during that relevant time, and was not negligent in failing to conclude and warn clients that market was “under stress” or “in trouble.” The Panel noted that:

In fact, the ARS market collapse was catastrophic for the market as a whole precisely because it was unforeseen by the sophisticated investors who had $330 billion invested in ARS at the time the ARS market collapsed in February 2008.

Third Cause Dismissed

Finally, the Panel dismissed the Third Cause because Jefferies was fully aware of and approved CCM’s practice of trading in the subject accounts without written authorization, which was consistent with industry practice.

Bill Singer‘s Comment

As I and many other industry commentators have long noted, the ARS market collapse was a circumstance that has victimized many public customers andmany registered persons.  While hindsight gives us superb 20/20 vision, the fact remains, and this Panel eloquently restated it, that this was an unforeseen collapse that bushwhacked even sophisticated market participants.

Think of a tsunami wave — you didn’t know it was coming; by the time the warning was issued, the wave was upon you; there was nothing you could have done to prevent it; there was nothing you could have done to avoid it; and you and everyone else were swept away in it path.

Proactively, Wall Street now knows that market earthquakes produce tsunami, and the oft-repeated ARS assurance that the auction markets were liquid and the investments “good as cash in the bank” were dead wrong.  Nassim Taleb has explained the stupidity of such false assurances and misplaced comfort in his Black Swan Theory, and I will not attempt to footnote his extensive treatise.

Suffice it to say, in my opinion, this FINRA Panel got it right.

The Respondent here was more victim than malefactor.  That, however, does not lessen the burden on Wall Street for having buried the markets and investors under a killer wave of toxic and exotic garbage; nor does it lessen the failure of too many industry professionals to have done more exacting due diligence.

Ultimately, these ARS cases have taken their toll among all facets of the brokerage industry — from smaller indie/regional firms, to the likes of E*Trade, Oppenheimer, Bank of AmericaCitigroup,  UBS and others.  The simple point in this case is that given the Respondent’s state of mind, he did not appear to have engaged in fraud or material misstatements — he repeated what he thought was correct without any obvious intent to defraud.

See some of these “Street Sweeper” articles:

E*Trade Settles Auction Rate Securities Case But The Product Keeps On Giving Grief (May 16, 2012)

Public Customer Seeks $1 Million From Oppenheimer in ARS Arbitration (December 2, 2011)

The Ghost of Bear Stearns Raised in $59 Million FINRA ARS Arbitration Against JP Morgan (November 8, 2011)

US Airways Lands $15 Million FINRA Auction Rate Securities Award (June 2, 2011)

Arbitration Litigates ARS Suitability (December 29, 2010)

Also see,  the Securities And Exchange Commission’s “Auction Rate Securities” webpage for a comprehensive discussion of ARS, why it failed, and the industry’s settlements.


Previous Entries
March 27, 2015
On March 27, 2015, after a month of trial testimony and three days of deliberations, a California Superior Court jury found that Plaintiff Ellen Pao... Read On
March 27, 2015
In today's Blog, we have what I often refer to as a "yes, but" case. I'm sure you have encountered such ambivalence with many matte... Read On
March 26, 2015
Wall Street is supposed to be protected by smoke detectors in the form of endless amounts of rules and regulations, massive volumes of written superv... Read On
March 25, 2015
In 2006, after suffering several miscarriages, UPS driver Peggy Young became pregnant; and, in consideration of her prior pregnancies, her doctor ins... Read On
March 25, 2015
In the great 1967 film "Cool Hand Luke," we get that iconic line about "What we've got here is failure to communicate."  The scene involves the b... Read On
March 24, 2015
On March 24, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued its Opinion in Omnicare, Inc., Et Al. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pen... Read On
March 24, 2015
Stockbroker, Compliance, Legal, and Regulatory JobsEmployment Page Jobs#wallstreetjobs @brokeandbrokerNOTICE TO EMPLOYERS: Brok... Read On
March 23, 2015
Consumer advocates and regulators tend to dislike so-called "exotic" or "leveraged" Exchange Traded Funds ("ETFs"). Many of the concerns are legitimat... Read On
March 21, 2015
Merrill Lynch Blindsided By Former Employee In Promissory Note CaseThe big boys just don't tend to lose their promissory note cases with any regularit... Read On Job Search

Related Topics
Tag Cloud
Internet FINRA Bear Stearns Bloomberg SEC NASD NYSE Money Laundering Due Diligence Waiver Forbes China Chepucavage Broy Woody Allen Madoff NAC NPR Marketplace Stanford UBS Ketchum Antitrust NASDAQ RRBDLAW Schapiro Bill Singer BrokerAndBroker USERRA Morgan Keegan Arbitration Counterclaim Khuzami BrokeAndBroker Aleynikov Goldman Sachs brokeandbroker Promissory Note U4 Bill SInger EFL CFTC Huffington Post Flash Crash arbitration RBC Ponzi Affinity Fraud Wachovia Raymond James Expungement Fraud Securities Fraud Outside Business Activity Registered Rep Magazine FOREX FBI Banc of America Pro Se PCAOB Supreme Court Morgan Stanley Smith Barney E*Trade Margin email Galleon Penson U5 Defamation Protocol Wells Fargo Punitive Damages Citigroup Merrill Lynch ARS Employee Forgivable Loan Street Legal Morgan Stanley AWC Fidelity Bankruptcy Broke And Broker HFT David Sobel Day Trading Ameriprise Commissions Spouse Schwab Commission CRD Kenneth Starr IRS CNBC Complaint ATM Skimming Hacking Phishing Malware Naskovets Poteroba Koval Lincoln Financial Selling Away Outside Business Activities Rakoff 2nd Circuit Second Circuit IRA 401k Forgery Tax Email Netschi Moore Whistleblower Street Sweeper Countrywide Tran Bharara Facebook Online Severance Bonus Eligibility Rule TD Ameritrade Hedge Fund SAC 1099 Smith Barney Lehman Brothers SIPC IC3 Scottrade Lehman JPMorgan Chase Hertz Insider Trading Bank of America Department of Justice Elles Bribe Auction Rate Securities Raiding Spam Edward Jones Medicare Diabetes Dow Schumer Thain Walter Bid Rigging Real Estate Discrimination Wall Street Statutory Disqualification Form U4 Form U5 Indictment Boyland DOJ Corruption bill singer FTC Do Not Call FINRA Arbitration Costa Rica Settlement LIBOR Varney Plea Rule 8210 Eligibility RRBDlaw Appeal Fowler LPL Johnson Cellphone US Airways JPM Reg D MSSB Vault Loan SunTrust Discovery Employment Rosenthal Recruiting Lawyer Trading Platform JP Morgan Employment Tuesday Wrongful Termination Bank Guarantee WaMu Solicitation REIT Martin Credit Cards Rule 3050 Away Account Credit Repair PN Advisor Placement Group Fifth Amendment Forex Mortgage Private Placement Moon CGMI Failure to Supervise Merrill Anderson Exam Lee Borrowing Tax Lien Conversion Oppenheimer Wedbush Felony Misdemeanor Expenses ING Lien OTR Estate Jobs Florida Credit Card Elderly Flash Drive Annuity Expense Reimbursement FNMA BrokeAndBroke TIC DWI Promissory Notes Suitability Will POA Power of Attorney Casino NSF MF Global Counterfeit Preet Bharara Corzine Hacker Deferred Compensation RIA Prison Disclosure NASAA Aguilar FCPA Subway Identity Theft Gold Dell Bar Injunction Bank Deutsche Bank Hospital Due Process God HSBC Private Placements Eric Stein Wire Fraud FINOP CCO Compliance Audit Joshua Brown Backstage Wall Street Obstruction of Justice Reuters Retaliation Variable Annuity Arbitraiton Outside Account Options Telephone Wine Series 7 Social Media ADA Pacifico Non-Prosecution Agreement Confirm Tax Fraud Retirement OBA Equity Indexed Annuities EIA Disability MetLife Continuing Education Cheating OIP Tax Liens Willful CE Unregistered Impersonation Annuities BBVA Business Expenses ETF JOBS Act Mail Fraud Parking Variable Annuities Signatures BitTorrent Impersonator Wire Transfer Wire Crowdfunding Nasdaq Away Accounts WSP Laptop Dodd Frank Checks RMBS AML PST Solicited Unsolicited Congress SRO Wife Discretion Non-Solicitation Restaurant Commodities Private Securities Transaction Offer of Settlement Money Market employment jobs Great Recession Chase Investment Services Arrest Barclays Liens Failure To Supervise Apple Time And Price T&P Willfully Husband Letter of Authorization LOA Sexism Debit Card Knight Test Practice Sale Unfair Competition Signature Judgments Undisclosed Settlement Trainee Fee Trust Laser Side Bar Mattera Female Sales Assistant Kennedy Charge Sexist NML Argentina Embezzlement Silver Investor Alert Judgment Bank Fraud Deceased Bill Singer BrokeAndBroker TSSB OHO Leveraged ETF Mary Jo White Trustee Motion To Dismiss Frumento Conspiracy 6th Circuit Proctor Rule 3040 Class Action Beneficiary NYAG Schneiderman 11th Circuit Insurance Gallagher White Self Regulation Short Sale Compromise Website Rule 2010 TRO Supervision Vacatur Remand SDNY Rule 12206 BrokeAndBroker Bill Singer Piwowar Stifel Rule 1122 Article V signature Confidential Inside Information Reg SP VA Regulation SP Customer Rule 3270 Rule 3240 Annual Compliance Questionnaire OWB 2Cir Red Flags Payroll Stockbrokers Cybercrime Loans Altered Records
Email Bill Singer Connect with Bill Singer on Facebook Follow Bill Singer on Twitter Link up with Bill Singer on LinkedIn Join Bill Singer on Google+