A New Day, A New Start

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.
Jul 27, 2005 5:30 pm

The NASD has a unit known as the Central Regsitration Depository or CRD.  It is the source of information concerning everybody who is registered.


There are two levels of information security.  A series of facts about you, and me, that is available to the public.  Things such as the firms where you worked, the dates and so forth.  It also includes information as to whether or not you ADMITTED culpability in a customer complaint, if you were dismissed for cause and things such as that.


There is a second tier or information as well.  This information is highly sensitive and is not shared with the publc.  It is at this tier that they keep track of things such as the number of attempts you had at an exam, what your scores were and so forth.


Also in this tier are the answers to the questions on a U-4 that are admitted, but not publically.  If a client sues you you will be required to answer yes on a U-4 but that yes answer is not necessarily "discloseable."


Here's why.


That suit would have almost certainly been closed and regardless of how it came down you and your firm will have neither admitted nor denied the foundation of the suit.  Grab a third Thursday Wall Street Journal and find the section where they list everybody who was disciplined in the last month.


You will find wording to the effect of "....without admitting or denying....."  That is CRITICAL because since you neither admittrf nor denied the information it is techincally nothing more than a rumor and the NASD is not going to be releasing rumors about you.


So, it is possible that you could be sued by a client who alleges that you churned their account.  The suit was settled with a payment of $50,000 without admitting or denying.


When somebody asks if you have a clean record they will be told that the NASD has a record of a resolved customer complaint.  Nothing more than that.


So the person running the inquiry rightfully concludes, "Well, I suspect anybody could have a customer complaint.  He does too, but it's resolved and he's still in the business so it can't have been too bad."


For older broikers there is more good news.  Anything that happened before the mandate to make things public is not included.  In other words the public only has a right to know about your record since the record became public.


That, by the way, is another of those things that the useless management layer accomplished.  Older brokers could have been real rogues in their youth and nobody would know about it because what they did before 1985 (or whenever the date is) was not included in the public disclosure database.


The thinking at the time was that real rogue brokers were gone--that the industry has a way of self policing itself so there was no need to bother to track what had already happened.


That old guy sitting over there in the corner office may have been in court more times than you can shake a stick at--but nobody knows it because it was a new day.


He got a new start sometime about twenty years ago.


Jul 27, 2005 5:59 pm

Put, I find it very hard to believe that you have time to not only run an office, but also right such long and self-serving posts.  Go away.

Jul 27, 2005 6:02 pm
mrad:

Put, I find it very hard to believe that you have time to not only run an office, but also right such long and self-serving posts.  Go away.


Why would you not want to know what I am saying?

Jul 27, 2005 6:05 pm
mrad:

Put, I find it very hard to believe that you have time to not only run an office, but also right such long and self-serving posts.  Go away.

Jul 27, 2005 6:08 pm

Put, your conclusions don't mesh with your supposed facts. And, some of your facts are plain wrong.  Yes the public does not currently get to access the details on everything in your CRD history, although there are moves by regulators to try to expand that.  But, everything that's in your record is available to the industry and regulators.  So, if there are any rogue brokers sitting in your chopshop firm, both the regulators and your firm knew that when you hired them.


And, your discourse about the hiding of settled suits, etc. -- if you have settled a complaint, suit, etc. for $10k or more it is disclosable FOREVER as a "yes" answer & is on your CRD record.  Your record, contrary to what you said, would NOT be reflected as being clean, because you'd have a "yes" answer.  So, you can "neither admit nor deny" until the cows come home, but you'll still have that reflected forever on your CRD.  I suggest you read a U-4 sometime.  You'll learn something & will stop you from posting erroneous stuff.


So, what was the purpose of your post?  Besides being boring, it's wrong.


And, regarding public access to our records, we're the only industry to my knowledge that has to put up with that.  We can't check on the malpractice record of a doctor who has our very life in his hands.  We can't check on the status of an airline pilot who has 100's of people's lives in his hands every day. 

Jul 27, 2005 6:14 pm
Duke#1:

And, regarding public access to our records, we're the only industry to my knowledge that has to put up with that.  We can't check on the malpractice record of a doctor who has our very life in his hands.  We can't check on the status of an airline pilot who has 100's of people's lives in his hands every day. 



Yes you can check on your doctors--my wife has done it for every one we have encountered in recent years.


As for pilots, what would you want to know about them?  Those who fail are either dead or heroes.


As for the U-4.  I did not say that an inquiry would not turn up the yes answer.  What I said is that the yes answer at the public disclosure level is nothing more than a resolved yes answer.  The customer, or prospect, is not given the details of the charges--just that there was an action and that it has been resolved.

Jul 27, 2005 8:34 pm

Put- Can you research the origin and development of the habitat of the North American Mule Deer Mr Encyclopedia???

Jul 28, 2005 12:40 am
Tough Questions:
mrad:

Put, I find it very hard to
believe that you have time to not only run an office, but also right
such long and self-serving posts.  Go away.


Why would you not want to know what I am saying?





LOL....that last question sort of
sums it all up, IMHO.  You old-line management types at the
wirehouses, and all your little minion's in the 'marketing' and
'product management' functions just don't get it.  You just can't
possibly comprehend nor imagine the fact that most advisors on the
front lines just don't give a rats arse about your point of view on the
world, or how to present themselves to clients, or what you should
recommend.  It is simply impossible for you to conceive that if
you didn't come to work tomorrow, and the next day, and so on, that few
of us would miss you.



Nope, we don't really want to hear what you're saying because we have
more important things to consider, and real work to get done.....

Jul 28, 2005 6:09 am
Sknits Tihs:

What this means is that Put has a record that he's glad is kept secret, because if we all knew the truth, he raisin lookin' head would crawl back into the sewer from whence he came.


Nothing Put has ever said would indicate that his record is anything other than typical.  Nobody makes it through thirty years in this business without so much as a customer complaint.


But let's suppose he does have a past.  Let's suppose that he was suspended for a year.  For most people that would be a "death sentence" of sorts--most people would  have to get a job in another industry and would probably just make their way in that industry rather than come back to Wall Street.


For that matter, who would hire somebody who had been suspended for a year if they did come back?


Wait, what if you were the child of a senior executive?  Do you suppose that you could get back into the business after your suspension?


Why I bet you could.  I'll bet it would be easy in fact.


You know what else?  I'll bet that what happened to you would never come to light unless you applied for a job somewhere else--and why would you if you were the prince and future king?


But you know what?  Princes and future kings often have other ambitions.  Suppose that you floated a "trail balloon" that you might use your family's wealth to run for office.  Would it be beyond the pale that the opposition party might come up with your history?  Might it make the newspapers in the form of a story such as, "Mr. Jones, who has indicated an interest in running for office was suspended by the National Association of Securities Dealers several years ago.  Requests for comments from the Jones campaign have not be honored, but this reporter will stay on the case."


You know who else might turn it up?  The staff of an organization doing due dilligence into the history of a person being considered for a seat on the organization's board of directors.


We all have a past, and while it is not always visible to everybody it is not invisible either.


Mind your P's and Q's boys and girls.