In today's Blog we got a FINRA regulatory decision, a state court judgment, a bankruptcy, and a federal court action. As the legal matters now stand, some defrauded customers are left scratching their heads. All of which prompts us to consider the outdated, unworkable construct of FINRA. The experiment of allowing Wall Street to regulate itself has been abused for so many decades as to undercut virtually any argument favoring the continuation of FINRA. If you need proof, just consider one federal court's awkward attempt to explain what FINRA is or isn't. It's sort of a horse. It's sort of a donkey. It's sort of a mule but it isn't except it is . . . sort of.
When considering an appeal questioning FINRA's denial of an expungement request, the SEC seems to have approached its deliberation as a cat toying with a dead mouse. There seems no rush in the effort and not much accomplished beyond playing with a dead-on-arrival case. Shamefully, the SEC took 50 months to deny the appeal.
A public customer filed a FINRA Arbitration Statement of Claim against Wells Fargo Advisors and asked for no less than $100,000 in damages. The arbitrators found in the customer's favor and awarded about $99,000 in damages and fees. For whatever reasons, the customer appealed the FINRA Award to federal District Court, which looked somewhat askance at a quintessential shotgun pleading and a myriad of motions. On appeal, a Circuit Court affirms the District's dismissal.