VALIC IncomeLOCK Arbitration Results in Unusual Victory for Broker

or Register to post new content in the forum

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Nov 10, 2010 9:40 am

  

Customer Loses FINRA Arbitration Over VALIC IncomeLOCK Annuity Option #0066cc ;"> http://www.brokeandbroker.com/index.php?a=blog&id=633

In a FINRA Arbitration Statement of Claim filed in September 8, 2009, public customer Anil Chawla complained about alleged losses that he sustained through the purchase of VALIC variable annuities.  The "transaction" at issue relates to the implementation of an "IncomeLOCK" rider on two existing VALIC variable annuity accounts, which were among some five accounts Claimant Chawla held with VALIC as part of his Massachusetts Optional Retirement Program. 

The history of this dispute apparently included Claimant Chawla’s filing of complaints to his UMASS Pension Office, and to the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office. In response to those complaints, the Respondents agreed to annul Claimant's election of the IncomeLOCK rider; however, that concession did not extend beyond the annulment and an agreement to provide compensation to Claimant for any alleged losses.

  

A FINRA Arbitration Panel concluded that Claimant Chawla did not understand the IncomeLOCK rider.

However, the Panel also concluded that Respondent Ring believed that Claimant understood her explanations of the rider. 

Clearly an inconsistent finding by the Panel -- but if you read the case, you will be impressed by the logic of that conclusion.  Also, look for this oddity: The Panel, on its own motion, recommended the expungement of the arbitration from a broker's CRD file.

No, you don't see that everyday!

#0066cc ;"> http://www.brokeandbroker.com/index.php?a=blog&id=633  

#0066cc ;">The World Bank, The Fed And A $7 Million Investment Scheme

#0066cc ;">By Bill Singer, the "Street Sweeper"

The so-called advance-fee scam is becoming a common rip-off scheme.

Where did all those millions go? Dodakian and Wu spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of the proceeds from their criminal acts on personal purchases. Specifically, Dodakian used victims' money for mortgage and college tuition payments, and Wu bought luxury goods and diamond jewelry worth $17,000. In addition, Dodakian withdrew over $600,000 of victims’ money in cash, and Wu withdrew nearly $200,000.

As a result of the fraudulent schemes perpetrated by Dodakian and Wu some victims lost their life savings and their homes, and two victims were unable to afford healthcare expenses related to chronic illnesses. This idiocy is far more than a financial crime. This is a human tragedy.

#0000ff; font-size: small;">READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AT:

#800080;">http://www.brokeandbroker.com/index.php?a=blog&id=631

#800080;">