|
|
|
Distinguished Toastmaster
BUSINESS & BRANDING COACH . LIFE & LEADERSHIP STRATEGIST MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER SERVING ENTREPRENEURS & MAIN STREET |
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
GO FUND ME, F.I.N.R.A. (c) Carrie Devorah :
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
GO FUND ME, F.I.N.R.A. (c) Carrie Devorah :
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
|
It’s brilliant. But then, aren’t all con men brilliant until they get caught. Like French models on the internet, they riff their rap until someone catches on. And then? The cover up begins. |
About not so long ago, F.I.N.R.A. sought a comment that F.I.N.R.A. did not promote on its sight. The lawyers business league that promotes itself, too, as ‘for the protection of investors’ caught on the Federal Register that F.I.N.R.A. was seeking to move their F.I.N.R.A. D.R.S., that is short for Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Dispute Resolution, in and under their F.I.N.R.A. Regulation, Inc.
F.I.N.R.A. is the S.E.C. one and only singular S.R.O. the Commission approved under the S.E.C. interpretation of Congress’ Act stating the Commission was to approve multiple S.R.O.s. For what?
Disputes between Brokers and their Brokerages or, conversely, the Brokerages and their Brokers. Sum total, of it. BD’s and the firm that employs them. Employment? A whole other conversation for another day but no, in short, too often lone wolves looking to join a pack. But the consumer would not know that, courtesy of the one and only S.R.O. that the Commission approved. Lists the lone wolves, the desk renters as “Employees.” I.R.S. definition needed here, please.
The impact of the S.R.O. moving their D.R.S. into their F.I.N.R.A. Regulation is mounds full. You see, Congress never told the Commission to let the S.R.O. get its paws on investment client and investment advisor disputes. Yet, the S.R.O. has and done so for decades.
Motivation? Simple. You cant make them do the time if no one gets to know about the crime.
The world sorta owes Bernie Madoff a big one. Madoff broke the Commission complicit crimes coverup when Madoff walked in to the U.S. attorney offices and said ‘I did it.’ U.S. Attorneys are a funny lot. Not necessarily the brightest bulbs in the legal pack the public depends on. U.S. Attorneys focus on laws broken not on the paper trail that leads a convoluted path up until the crime hits their office’s vote for ‘which crime will be pursue.’ You didn’t know that. Nor did I. The Commission votes on who to charge, as do U.S. Attorneys. Madoff was on Attorney General U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch’s watch, in New York. Yup. Loretta like all the other legal lemmings leapt in to action after Bernie did all the hard work for them. Bernie walked through the U.S. Attorney door and did, what is called here in D.C., a grip and grip. And then they cuffed him. Book ‘em, Dano. Done, with a whole lot of crowing despite moi showing them the docs I found showing that Madoff was doing his industry wide thing since 1963.
So you are getting the picture on why the Commission only approved S.R.O. wants to bury the D.R.S. fast? Cant testify against your spouse, so to speak.
The S.R.O. brokercheck screengrab says it all, almost. Check it out.
Broker
Investment Adviser
The screengrab also says 4 disclosures, 31 year(s) in securities industry Passed 4 exam(s) Registered with 17 U.S. states and Territories. Looks good, doesn’t it. Not. It doesn’t state the number of complaints, the number of D.R.S., the number of settled D.R.S. nor the number of expungements. Yeah. Expungments. That is the Commission approved S.R.O. term for what for the rest of us would be ‘life after reputation death if caught doing the crimes these guys walk scot free when accused with lying, stealing, cheating, and, oh yeah, living high off the hog on clients hard earned cash.
Watch American Greed. Notate the U.S. Attorneys all smart after the fact of these decades old crime patterns, considering the U.S. Attorneys didn’t caught on to the massage of Congress’ law. Like the rest of us plebians, U.S. Attorneys are people, too. Human.
Definition, Broker:
“A brokerage firm, also called a broker-dealer, is in the business of buying and selling securities—stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and certain other investment products—on behalf of its customers (as broker), for its own account (as dealer), or both. Individuals who work for broker-dealers — the sales personnel are commonly referred to as brokers.”
Definition, Investment Adviser:
“An investment adviser is paid for providing advice about securities to clients. In addition, some investment advisers manage investment portfolios and offer financial planning services.
It is common for a financial professional to act as both a broker and an investment adviser. Because of this, we include investment advisers on BrokerCheck, and provide links to the SEC's Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) website so you can research further.”
Any wonder there is confusion over what is an Investment Adviser and what is a Broker?
Then the page states:
“The information presented in BrokerCheck pertains only to experience in the securities industry. This individual is also an Investment Adviser. Please visit the Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) website for more information.”
The statement does list stocks and securities. In an arbitration, one may learn the hard way, the separation of church and state the Industry respondents clings to escape liability of the monies lost being claimed.
The brokercheck screenbrag illustrates how the S.R.O. has been covering up financial crimes and covering for financial criminals by allowing the Respondent to switch hats at their convenience, sort of like bi’s who swing both ways- west coast or east coast- whatever they need to be on that given day- but never residents in both states at the same time, by legal definition.
Ever been in an arbitration? The P.I.A.B.A. attorneys alleging to be ‘for investor protection’ swing both ways when it comes to appearances. Some days the P.I.A.B.A. attorneys argue for the Industry respondent(s), the Broker, the dealer, the Brokerage and the Investment Advisor. Some days the P.I.A.B.A. attorneys argue for the ripped off investment client.
The P.I.A.B.A. attorneys don’t exactly give the client a score card of their wins or losses, what the P.I.A.B.A. attorney got for an injured client on how much claimed. Nor does the P.I.A.B.A. attorneys cop to telling how many S.R.O. D.R.S. they sat in on, what role they played and the outcome of the S.R.O. D.R.S.
Its called privacy, the P.I.A.B.A. attorney says. More like cover up. Several reasons.
Had the D.R.S. taken place in the courts, the record of the D.R.S. would be public. That said in an internet world, the D.R.S. would be published all over the internet by now. And sold. As PDFs. Not to worry. Public record does not mean the PDF nor the people named in it can be trafficked on the Internet to places and parties unknown.
Yeah, I know. Legislators rarely read the laws wrote before them.
But what the P.I.A.B.A. attorneys do is masterful for them, after all, the P.I.A.B.A. attorneys has bills to pay too.
The P.I.A.B.A. attorney will jab his funky finger at the Discovery the Industry attorney usually is the only one to get hold off in the S.R.O. D.R.S. with the assistance of the S.R.O. Case Managers holed up in Boca. Why Boca? Above my paygrade but I would hazard a guess it is a tax avoidance or deference thing.
The P.I.A.B.A. attorney will belligerently shout at the Claimant “You hired a broker.” And the Claimant, the investment client will say, “no, I hired an investment advisor” and the P.I.A.B.A. attorney will raise his voice louder and shout at the ripped off investment client “You say you did not hire a broker? You mean to say you don’t know what a brokerage is?”
Well, dollars to donuts, the harmed client knows what they hired, thought the papers they have shows their testimony under oath is their truth. But, there is that brokercheck 'thing' that former Congressman, now Senator, Ed Markey facilitated with the best of intentions without, or with, realizing that between Congress and Main Street stands a Commission approving the rules and Forms of the S.R.O. that Congress may never have given permission for- to engage with Investment Clients and Advisors.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. When the client who has accepted what the attorney told them that they had to sue in the S.R.O. because the S.R.O. dues paying members gave them contracts they signed has a dispute, more often not they do not understand they were giving up their right to sue in the Courts if there was a dispute, agreeing to submit to S.R.O. D.R.S. forum.
It is impressive to read that P.I.A.B.A. members are
- Presidents or Directors, Emeritus or otherwise of P.I.A.B.A. the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association
- serving on or chairing the National Arbitration and Mediation Committee of FINRA (formerly the NASD)
- providing recommendations on rules, regulations and procedures governing arbitrations, mediations and dispute resolution
- as a public member of S.I.C.A. the Securities Industry Conference on Arbitration. The Commission created S.I.C.A. the support of the Securities and Exchange Commission to “protect the interests of public investors in securities arbitration”
- serves as one of two investor advocates on S.I.P.C. the Securities Investor Protection Corporation modernization task force
- serves as a member of the FINRA Arbitration Task Force charged with improving the transparency, impartiality and efficiency of securities arbitration
- serves as a NASD faculty for training of discovery arbitrators
- serves on the NASD Neutral Roster Task Force
- serves on the FINRA Arbitrator Training Task Force
- serves on the FINRA Discovery Guide Task Force
Seems, again, the investment client got goosed or, fleeced.
The point is, lets step back to the beginning. The attorneys, the S.R.O. and the Commission know that Congress limited the forum scope to Brokers and Brokerages, and that taking investment clients in to that forum is a con game.
So there is no mistaking, if the suee, the Industry Respondent successfully dodges liability with the Broker/investment advisor/brokerage hat change game, the harmed investor is at a loss because S.I.P.C. and S.I.C.A. are available on to clients of ‘brokers’, ‘dealers’ and brokerages not to harmed clients of investment advisors who morph in to ‘brokers’ inside the Commission sanctioned S.R.O. D.R.S. that Congress did not authorize nor approve to engage with investment clients and investment advisors.
It seems the investor may be needing protection from its self proclaimed ‘protectors.’ It’s like seeing the woodcarved “Honest Lawyer” sign above a lawyer’s desk. If they have to tell you what they is, they ain’t run. With Congress messing up, where do investors run to.
Don’t get me wrong. There are good lawyers and investment advisors out there. The problem is age old. People don’t like admitting they have been wronged. Or fleeced. Others? They take the street mantra on and ‘work it, girl’ when the S.R.O. plays dirty pool.
Now you get why the S.R.O. allows its dues paying member brokerages to claim Investment Advisors as their clients. Here, bluntly, to change hats, to duck liability, to cover up their breaking the rules Congress wrote. No. Forget about the Commission. It has no authority. Its like a lackey. Its regulatory. All it can do is what Congress tells it to do. Nothing more. And, technically, nothing less like it has.
Hire an investment advisor. They hook you up with a ‘brokerage’ they tell you they ‘clear’ through. That means, moreso when they are lone wolves, that they need to join a club, yeah, like a Costco, better yet, like a tech hive or a vintage antique mall, a collective in order to get the perks of being part of something bigger. And you don’t grasp that from the 10 page teeny tiny print agreement they give you, giving you their verbal cliff notes that you then sign and attest to and later, in dispute, go ‘what?’
Its not that complicated when one finishes sorting through the weeds. Its disappointing.
As for P.I.A.B.A. participating on the Boards and Committees of the S.R.O., aiding in crafting laws that harm Main Street? Still looking for the law Congress wrote that put P.I.A.B.A. in to business. All I got is the letter from Congress that says Congress does not authorize private business.
Hmmm, check please. At this point, better make it a background check and investigation in to the S.R.O. D.R.S. before it disappears in to F.I.N.R.A. Regulation where no man or woman, who is not industry, should have ever gone before.
What is one to do when the abuser claims protection under the law, Congress’ law other than continue to connect the dots with tenacity, in the least protecting others, in the most, to hopefully re-compensate themselves.
At least, now you know, one of the tricks in the S.E.C. approved Wall Street con against Main Street investment clients.