March 20, 2009
One of the most popular features of http://RRBDLAW.com
is its comprehensive treatment of Statutory Disqualfication cases.
Nationally known Regulatory lawyer Bill Singer has updated http://www.rrbdlaw.com/STATDISQ/sdindex.htm
with the recently published 2008 FINRA SD decisions.
: X is statutorily disqualified because he pled guilty in April 2001, in a
State 1 state court to felony conspiracy to commit theft by deception. When
he was 18 and a senior in high school, X falsely reported to his insurance
company that his car had been stolen when, in fact, he had arranged for a
friend to take the vehicle. X reported on his Uniform Application for
Securities Industry Registration or Transfer ("Form U4") that "[m]y
senior year in high school, between school and sports it was very difficult
for me to work to pay my car and I was ashamed to tell my father to pay for
the car that I had promised to pay for. It was a humiliating mistake for me
and my family."
: X became statutorily disqualified In March 2006, when FINRA's Department
of Enforcement ("Enforcement") accepted his submission of a Letter of
Acceptance, Waiver and Consent ("AWC") for willfully
failing to disclose material information-his bankruptcy-on a Uniform
Application for Securities Industry Registration or Transfer ("Form
: X is statutorily disqualified because in 2006, the NAC issued a decision
imposing a bar in all capacities on X for his failure to respond to
FINRA's repeated requests for information in an ongoing investigation
regarding the adequacy of research reports.
: X is statutorily disqualified because he consented to a January 2003
Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent ("AWC"), in which FINRA imposed
an unqualified bar on him. The AWC found that from March through
December 2000, X violated NASD Rule 2110 by engaging in a practice known as
"cherry picking"-entering certain personal and customer trades into a
holding account with his then employer, Firm 1, without designating customer
account numbers, and then later, at the end of the trading day, allocating
the trades among these different accounts. The AWC also found that X
violated NASD Rules 2110 and 2510(b) by exercising discretionary authority
over the accounts of six customers by causing securities transactions to be
effected in these accounts without obtaining the customers' prior written
authorization and Firm 1's acceptance of the accounts as discretionary.
: X is statutorily disqualified because in September 2006, he pled guilty to
driving under the influence of alcohol ("DUI"), a felony in the
state of State 1. X's 2006 DUI conviction was a felony because he had
three prior DUI misdemeanor convictions in State 1 in 1995, 1987, and 1985.
All five of the above Statutorily Disqualified individuals sought re-entry
into the industry. How did they fare? Well, two were approved and
Don't Miss This Jaw Dropper: Among
the five cases above is one truly incredible fact pattern. In addition to
the specific event that caused the SD status, the registered person was charged
with felony child abuse and misdemeanor possession of marijuana. On top of
those criminal events, he was also named in five separate customer complaints.
The firm sponsoring his registration was fined three times by NASD/FINRA from
1997 through 2004. Did FINRA let him back him or keep the door shut?
You'll have to read the decisions to find out.
STREET'S NEWEST ONLINE RESOURCE: http://BrokeAndBroker.com