BROWSE BY TOPIC
Stories of Interest
- Credit Suisse Fully Compliant on Sanctions: CEO
- Ex-UBS Metals Trader Beats Spoofing Conspiracy Charge
- Investment Advisor, WCAS Management Corp, To Pay Nearly $800K Over Conflicts of Interest
- Altaba, fka Yahoo!, to Pay $35Mn for Failing to Disclose Massive Cybersecurity Breach - SEC
- SEC Formerly Bars Martin Shkreli from Industry
- HF Billionaire Steve Cohen Buying Into Fintech Start-Ups
- Deutsche Bank Is Weighing Massive Cuts in Its U.S. Cash Equities Unit
- Richard Jenrette, Co-Founder of DLJ Investment Bank, Dies at 89
- Goldman Sachs Makes First Hire in Cryptocurrency Markets Unit
- Special FINRA Election to Fill Large Firm Governor Vacancy
- Chicago-Based Investment Adviser Sentenced to 151 Months in Prison - SEC
- Dun & Bradstreet Hit With FCPA Violations - SEC
- SEC Charges Additional Defendant in Fraudulent ICO Scheme
- Warren Buffett Simply Blew it on Wells Fargo Stock: Dick Bove (Video)
- Barclays and Deutsche Bank to Lag U.S. Trading Peers
- NY AG Schneiderman Seeks to Close Loophole That Could Let Trump Pardons Block State Charges
- 'Fearless Girl' is Moving to NYSE After Year Staring Down 'Charging Bull'
- What's In Your Wallet - American Express Shares Soar After Earnings Release
- Deutsche Bank's Executive Departures Continue Following Change in CEO
- Reflections of an Economist Commissioner (SEC's Piwowar)
We seek to provide information, insights and direction that may enable the Financial Community to effectively and efficiently operate in a regulatory risk-free environment by curating content from all over the web.
Stay Informed with the latest fanancialish news.
NEWSLETTERS & ALERTS
Broker Opens Pandora’s Box After Altering a Customer’s Annuity Account Profile
by Howard Haykin
Robert Hurley agreed to a $5K fine and a 2-month suspension to settle FINRA charges that he altered a customer’s signed variable annuity distribution form without the customer’s consent.
BACKGBOUND. Hurley, a resident of Agawam, MA, has 33 years with 3 firms. He holds a Series 6 (Investment Company Products/Variable Contracts Representative Exam) license. For whatever reason, Hurley left Pruco Securities in January 2016 after 32 years. He spent 5 months with LPL Financial before joining Key Investment Services. However, Key Investments U5’d him 2 months later in November 2016 because “RR admitted to altering and initialing for the client without the client's consent on a distribution form after the client had signed it.” Hurley had no prior disciplinary history.
FINRA FINDINGS. On 10/20/16, while registered with Key Investment Services, Hurley altered a customer’s signed variable annuity (“V/A”) distribution form without the customer’s consent.
- One alteration changed the payment frequency from monthly to annual.
- Another alteration modified how payments would be calculated.
- Hurley also placed the customer’s initials next to both alterations.
The alterations caused the customer to receive the following month a much larger V/A distribution payment than anticipated.
FINANCIALISH TAKE AWAYS. FINRA levied a $5K fine and a 2-month suspension – a relatively heavy sanction, but apparently a reasonable one. However, the sanctions are such that the broker can re-enter the industry with another FINRA member firm. And that’s what concerns me. And my concerns arise not for what FINRA details in its case analysis, but for what FINRA leaves out.
Let’s begin with some unanswered questions.
- Why did Hurley leave Pruco, his only Wall Street employer, after 32 years?
- Why did Hurley last only 5 months with LPL Financial, which he joined just 3 months after leaving Pruco?
- What prompted Hurley to commit a violative act after 32 years without a single disciplinary disclosure?
- What prompted Hurley to make unauthorized changes to his customer’s V/A account that apparently had no impact to his compensation?
- Did Hurley seem troubled or unstable during interviews with FINRA investigators?
- Did FINRA investigators interview Pruco personnel about the circumstances of Hurley’s departure?
Context is everything, here. And with answers to these 6 questions, FINRA may have had justification for barring Hurley from the industry - i.e., that he posed significant danger to customers of a financial securities firm. Such a determination would have required “out-of-the-box” thinking, and perhaps FINRA personnel are either incapable of, or prohibited from, doing just that. Which would be shame because the potential for future danger is quite relevant in this case - as it is in many other cases.
And so the jury remains out on Mr. Hurley.
This case was reported in FINRA Disciplinary Actions for September 2017.
For details on this case, go to ... FINRA Disciplinary Actions Online, and refer to Case #2016052582701.