Stockbroker's Restaurant Lands Him In FINRA Hot Soup

July 14, 2014

Stockbrokers are often more than just that -- some of the men and women who serve in registered representative capacities on Wall Street are also entrepreneurs with various outside interests. In and of itself, there's nothing wrong with branching out. Of course, there are rules and regulations that require, at a minimum, prior notice to an employer brokerage firm of most outside activities and impose a further precondition that you obtain your employer's prior written authorization. Also, there are limits on how and from whom you can raise funds.  For many, the first they learn of all these requirements is when they get called into a compliance department office or get a nastygram from some regulator. Consider today's BrokeAndBroker.com Blog.

Case In Point

For the purpose of proposing a settlement of rule violations alleged by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA"), without admitting or denying the findings, prior to a regulatory hearing, and without an adjudication of any issue, Robert C. Mondi submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent ("AWC"), which FINRA accepted. 
In the Matter of Robert C. Mondi, Respondent (AWC 2013035588001, June 10, 2014).

Mondi was first registered in 2001 and the AWC asserts that he had no prior relevant disciplinary history.

A La Carte Menu

The AWC asserts that in 2011, Mondi had engaged in a restaurant business without having provided prior written notice to his FINRA member firm, in violation of FINRA Rules 3270 and 2010.

Additionally, the AWC alleges that in July 2011, Mondi borrowed $35,000 from a customer for investment in his restaurant; and, thereafter, in August 2011, he borrowed aother $20,000 from that customer for the same purpose. The AWC deems both loans to have been made in violation of FINRA Rules 3240 and 2010.

AFTER-DINNER DRINKS

According to online FINRA records as of June 27, 2014, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney ("MSSB") noted that a customer complaint was received on May 29, 2012, seeking $50,000 in alleged damages based upon allegations:

CLIENT'S ATTORNEY ALLEGES THAT RR, "WHILE WORKING FOR MSSB PREVIOUSLY SOLICITED A LOAN AND/OR INVESTMENT IN A PERSONAL BUSINESS/RESTAURANT WHICH THE RR WAS A PARTNER/OWNER" THE ATTORNEY ALLEGES THE CLIENT LOST APPROXIMATELY $50,000

As of September 25, 2012, MSSB deemed the customer complaint as "Closed/No Action" and provided the following statement from Mondi:

THIS CLIENT COMPLAINT WAS REGISTERED BY THE CLIENT ONLY AFTER THE FIRM SENT A DEMAND LETTER TO THE CLIENT TO PAY THE FIRM AN UNSECURED DEBIT BALANCE IN THE CLIENT ACCOUNT. THE FIRM SENT A LETTER IN RESPONSE ON 7/20/2012 WHICH INCLUDED, INTER ALIA, A REJECTION OF THE CLIENT COMPLAINT AS WELL AS A FURTHER DEMAND FOR AMOUNTS OWED TO THE FIRM, AND THEN CONTINUED TO HAVE COMMUNICATIONS WITH CLIENT'S ATTORNEY ABOUT THE COMPLAINT. NOW WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT THE CLIENT COMPLAINT PORTION OF THE MATTER CAN BE CLOSED, AS IT APPEARS THE ATTORNEY IS NO LONGER PURSUING THE CLIENT COMPLAINT AND IS NOT TAKING ANY ACTION IN THAT REGARD.

Online FINRA Records further state that on December 14, 2012, MSSB "Discharged" Mondi based upon allegations:

CONCERNS REGARDING AN OUTSIDE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENT WITH A FIRM CLIENT THAT WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO THE FIRM.

The Tab

In accordance with the terms of the AWC, FINRA imposed upon Mondi a $5,000 fine and a 7-month suspension from associating with any FINRA member firm in any capacity

Now, let's take an opportunity to review the salient points of FINRA Rule 3240.  See the language of the Rule below with my commentary:

3000. SUPERVISION AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATING TO ASSOCIATED PERSONS
3200. RESPONSIBILITIES RELATING TO ASSOCIATED PERSONS 
3240. Borrowing From or Lending to Customers 

Bill Singer's Comment: Note that the Rule addresses both borrowing and lending, but that such activities are proscribed here only to the extent that the contra-side of the arrangement is a customer. Member firms can choose to permit registered persons to borrow from or lend to their customers consistent with this rule OR the member may prohibit the practice in whole or in part.  As such, simply because FINRA's Rule sets forth conditions that could permit borrowing/lending does not mean that a given FINRA member is required by the regulator to allow such activity.

(a) Permissible Lending Arrangements; Conditions 
No person associated with a member in any registered capacity may borrow money from or lend money to any customer of such person unless: 

Bill Singer's Comment: Note that the specific proscription here is from borrowing/lending to any customer of "such person" -- the limitation is on contemplated activity with "your" customer and not merely a customer of your firm.  

(1) the member has written procedures allowing the borrowing and lending of money between such registered persons and customers of the member;

Bill Singer's Comment: The threshold requirement is that you cannot borrow/lend with your customers unless your member firm has written procedures allowing borrowing/lending between registered persons and customers of the firm.  If there are no written procedures, you can't get around this by walking into someone's office or making a phone call call to some compliance type and getting a verbal "okay."

(2) the borrowing or lending arrangement meets one of the following conditions: 

Bill Singer's Comment: Preliminarily, FINRA underscores that the Rule does not merely address borrowing from customers but also lending to them.

(A) the customer is a member of such person's immediate family; 

Bill Singer's Comment: What constitutes an "immediate family" member? Good question, and one that is pointedly answered in section (c), below.  Why is that critical definition not immediately provided here following the first use of the term? Hey, don't get me started with how rules are drafted. Bottom line, one of the five approved categories of your customers with which you can borrow/lend is an immediate family member.

(B) the customer 
(i) is a financial institution regularly engaged in the business of providing credit, financing, or loans, or other entity or person that regularly arranges or extends credit in the ordinary course of business and  (ii) is acting in the course of such business;

Bill Singer's Comment: In addition to financial institutions engaged in the three covered businesses of providing credit, financing, or loans (such transactions typically include, but are not limited to, mortgages, personal loans, home equity lines of credit, and credit card accounts, and also include lending arrangements with an affiliate of the customer), a registered person could conceivably lend to or borrow from a non-financial institution or human being provided that the contra-party regularly arranges/extends credit (but apparently not also financing or loans -- those seem limited to financial institutions) in the ordinary course of business AND is so acting. Clearly, FINRA is warning you that the contemplated borrowing/lending must be in the ordinary course of business.

(C) the customer and the registered person are both registered persons of the same member; 

Bill Singer's Comment: Nothing like owing a co-worker money!  Nonetheless, if the lender/borrower is your customer and also registered at your member, then that satisfies one of the five conditions under this section.

(D) the lending arrangement is based on a personal relationship with the customer, such that the loan would not have been solicited, offered, or given had the customer and the [associated] registered person not maintained a relationship outside of the broker[/]-customer relationship; 

Bill Singer's Comment: If you and your customer have a personal relationship outside of the mere broker-customer relationship (perhaps high-school buddies, weekend softball teammates, or members of the same church) that might qualify as a circumstance in which the loan would be viewed as not springing solely from the broker-client relationship.
or 
(E) the lending arrangement is based on a business relationship outside of the broker-customer relationship;

Bill Singer's Comment: Similar to the "personal" relationship exception, if you have a separate business relationship that of broker-customer (perhaps your customer is a service provider to you in another business or a professional who handles some non-industry business matters for you) that may constitute the fifth condition.
and
(3) the requirements of paragraph (b) of this Rule are satisfied.   

(b) Notification and Approval 

Bill Singer's Comment: It can't be spelled out any plainer: This is about notifying your member AND getting your member's approval.  It's not one or the other.

(1) The registered person shall notify the member of the borrowing or lending arrangements described in paragraphs (a)(2)(C), (D), and (E) above prior to entering into such arrangements

Bill Singer's Comment: First off, the notification requirement must always be satisfied when your customer is not an immediate family member, a financial institution, or an entity/individual in the business of extending credit.  The other side of that equation, is that you must always first notify your firm of the arrangement, if your customer is another registered person at your firm, or if you are claiming a personal/business relationship exists.  Separately, the contemplated notice is prior to entering into the arrangement.

and the member shall pre-approve in writing such arrangements 

Bill Singer's Comment: The Rule requires the member firm to pre-approve in writing the requested arrangement.  You should not rely upon an oral okay -- and I don't care who at your firm tells you that it's okay to go ahead on the oral say-so. Just watch how that person double-tracks if FINRA asks for a confirmation of that advice.

The registered person shall also notify the member and the member shall pre-approve in writing any modifications to such arrangements, including any extension of the duration of such arrangements.

Bill Singer's Comment: Also, you can't play the old switcheroo.  If you asked for permission to engage in X and you subsequently modify the loan (particularly an extension of the loan's term or repayment), then you have to go through the entire notification and pre-approval in writing protocol.

(2) With respect to the borrowing or lending arrangements described in paragraph (a)(2)(A) above, a member's written procedures may indicate that registered persons are not required to notify the member or receive member approval either prior to or subsequent to entering into such borrowing or lending arrangements. 

Bill Singer's Comment: If you look back up to the top of the Rule, you will see the provision that would permit lending to or borrowing from customers who are also immediate family members (which still isn't formally defined, as yet, at this point of the Rule). Nonetheless, you may not need to notify your firm or get its prior approval if your customer is an immediate family member provided that your member has a specific written procedure waiving said notice and/or approval.

(3) With respect to the borrowing or lending arrangements described in paragraph (a)(2)(B) above, a member's written procedures may indicate that registered persons are not required to notify the member or receive member approval either prior to or subsequent to entering into such borrowing or lending arrangements, provided that, the loan has been made on commercial terms that the customer generally makes available to members of the general public similarly situated as to need, purpose and creditworthiness. For purposes of this subparagraph, the member may rely on the registered person's representation that the terms of the loan meet the above-described standards.  
Bill Singer's Comment: As to arrangements involving financial institutions (or credit providing companies/individuals), there is an exemption from the need to give notice or obtain approval provided that the loan will be made on commercial terms generally available to the similarly situated general public (taking into account need, purpose, and creditworthiness). FINRA does not necessarily require you to document those preconditions to your member and your representation may be deemed satisfactory.  The issue here is that you better not be getting a so-called "sweetheart deal."  Bottom line, the arrangement better pass the sniff test.

(c) Definition of Immediate Family 
The term "immediate family" means parents, grandparents, mother-in-law or father-in-law, husband or wife, brother or sister, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, son-in law or daughter-in-law, children, grandchildren, cousin, aunt or uncle, or niece or nephew, and any other person whom the registered person supports, directly or indirectly, to a material extent.   

Bill Singer's Comment: Finally -- here it is, the critical definition. Make sure to check the list and note that it can also cover folks whom you provide material support to on a direct or indirect basis.

********************
Supplementary Material:
.01 Record Retention. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this Rule, members shall preserve the written pre-approval for at least three years after the date that the borrowing or lending arrangement has terminated or for at least three years after the registered person's association with the member has terminated. 

Bill Singer's Comment: This language requires your member to preserve the written approvals for at least three years from the date the arrangement terminated or at least three years after the registered person's association has terminated with the member. Be careful not to misinterpret this retention provision: You must retain the pre-approval for three years from the date of the loan's termination or the registered person's termination from the subject member.