Today's BrokeAndBroker.com Blog presents a difficult scenario. Publisher Bill Singer offers rare and high praise for the efforts of a FINRA Office of Hearing Officers Hearing Panel and of the National Adjudicatory Council. The byproduct of those bodies' deliberations yielded two comprehensive Decisions of the highest caliber. Unfortunately, FINRA's Chief Hearing Officer stayed the proceedings after information had purportedly come to her attention and eventually compelled the hiring of outside counsel to conduct a review. Sadly, FINRA's lack of transparency about the underlying nature of the troubling information mars the proceedings. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
FINRA's NAC affirmed an OHO Decision's findings that Respondent had engaged in undisclosed PSTs, made false statements to his employer, and willfully caused the employer to file a misleading initial Form U4 and four misleading amendments. The NAC affirmed all OHO sanctions but eliminated the heightened supervision requirement.
That sound you hear is a federal court scratching its head. Before it on appeal is a FINRA Arbitration Award that lacks any explanation as to the fact... Read On
On September 6, 2023, FINRA declared the victories of two unopposed candidates in its Board of Governors elections; however, FINRA still declines to p... Read On