It trial time for Jones

or Register to post new content in the forum

16 RepliesJump to last post

 

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 18, 2005 3:09 pm

Looks like the CA AG has a case afterall...even if the Jonesies chant the same mantra..."Its all about the AGs politics." I guess the courtS disagree.


ORDER IN THE COURT!!



WALL ST. ROUNDUP
Lockyer Wins Decision in Edward Jones Suit

Josh Friedman

November 18, 2005

Consider California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer one-for-two this week in his crackdown on mutual fund sales practices.

On Tuesday, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge issued a tentative decision saying Lockyer's case against mutual fund giant American Funds was preempted by federal law. But on Thursday, a Sacramento appellate court ruled in the attorney general's favor in a separate suit involving brokerage Edward Jones & Co.

Edward Jones had challenged the suit Lockyer filed in December, which claimed that the St. Louis brokerage firm had violated California law by failing to properly disclose sales deals with a handful of mutual fund companies — including American Funds.

A Superior Court judge rejected Edward Jones' contention that the suit was preempted by federal law, and Thursday an appellate court in Sacramento upheld that ruling. The decision clears the way for a trial date to be set, the attorney general's office said.

— Josh Friedman

Nov 18, 2005 3:15 pm

Oops...and by the way...that was from the LA Times.


PUNKBYNATURE

Nov 18, 2005 3:50 pm

Bring it on! Think CA will get as much as MO did? Hmm, can't be good when the home state gets less than CA.

Nov 18, 2005 4:33 pm
Guest1:

Bring it on! Think CA will get as much as MO did? Hmm, can't be good when the home state gets less than CA.


Of course, the other side of that comment is..


Get Jones off their home turf and maybe they can be judged objectively.

Nov 18, 2005 5:13 pm
Guest1:

Bring it on! Think CA will get as much as MO did? Hmm, can't be good when the home state gets less than CA.


g1,


Can't be any better when 3 mill Hill couldn't get the locals to okay his request to stay on.

Nov 18, 2005 5:42 pm
Guest1:

Bring it on! Think CA will get as much as MO did? Hmm, can't be good when the home state gets less than CA.


Guest1, you are getting your wish....."CA" is going TO NAIL THEM!


You have been defending Edward Jones for so long on here you can't see the forest through the trees.   Edward Jones will get nailed by CA, or they will settle prior to going to court, they don't have the balls to go to court, when everything becomes public record


This could be much larger than the SEC fines..........It is potentially MUCH LARGER............


We will see who is RIGHT on this?


By the way did Edward Jones ever mail out a letter to it's clients telling them about the 75 Million and the fee agains Doug "3 Mil" Hill and the FACT he had to resign, he didn't do it by falling on a sword either............did he?   


This is a "TEST" to see if Guest1 can tell the TRUTH on this finally?  


ALL YOU READERS watch how he answers what should be a simple "YES" or "NO" answer...................................


Nov 18, 2005 5:46 pm

Edd, you missed the point, no surprise there

Nov 18, 2005 6:17 pm
Guest1:

Edd, you missed the point, no surprise there


Guest1


How aout an answer for the PLAYER?

Nov 18, 2005 6:27 pm

Player, please explain to the world why CA fine should be larger than that of the SEC?


Name a single company in history that has mailed out a letter to their constituents in regards to any fines or infractions.


Crawl back into your hole.

Nov 18, 2005 6:30 pm

Player, I do understand your issues with Weddle though. He did not allow you to do what seemed to make sense with your office.

Nov 19, 2005 2:44 am
Guest1:

Player, please explain to the world why CA fine should be larger than that of the SEC?   READ THE WSJ


Name a single company in history that has mailed out a letter to their constituents in regards to any fines or infractions.  NOT TRUE, MANY HAVE..............


Crawl back into your hole. Get off your knees I know when I'm licked



Guest1,


As usual you have NO FACTS, just slam what you don't know to be the TRUTH.................How have you survived selling without FACTS, oh you just lie to them?


Many Forms have been fined and sent out letters to their clients explaining the fines they received, but then again Edward Jones only thinks they are the only honest Firm, when in reality there are a lot of honest Firms and IR's doing the right thing.


By the way in the state of CA there is a penalty per infraction upto 25K, just do the numbers of transactrions Edward Jones does or did in CA, it could end up over 1 Billion in just fines alone, there have been several articles in the WSJ, but then again if you are like your clients you don't read it..................If, you did you wouldn't be asking the question, unless you are trying to cover up the blast that is going to hit Edward Jones

Nov 23, 2005 1:07 am

Bench Warmer,



What article in the WSJ are you referring to? What was the date?



What don't know? Making stuff up as usual? Maybe you should change your name to habitual hater / liar.



What article on what what date. C'mon back up your nonsense.



BPD

Nov 23, 2005 1:31 am
BigPayDay:

Bench Warmer,

What article in the WSJ are you referring to? What was the date?

What don't know? Making stuff up as usual? Maybe you should change your name to habitual hater / liar.

What article on what what date. C'mon back up your nonsense.

BPD


HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU HAVE THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO LOOSE?  


BigPayDay you just love getting your ass kicked don't you............................Bring it on...................stop the name calling, everyone on here knows you do that when you don't have answers or just can't handle the TRUTH...............


HAPPY

Nov 23, 2005 10:46 am

Bench Warmer,



What article in the WSJ are you referring to? What was the date?



What don't know? Making stuff up as usual? Maybe you should change your name to habitual hater / liar.



What article on what what date. C'mon back up your nonsense.



BPD



P.S. I am talking about the specific article you referenced in the above post regarding possibly $1billion in EJ fines. (Yeah that will happen, when you stop using emoticons.)

Nov 24, 2005 2:10 am
BigPayDay:

Bench Warmer,

What article in the WSJ are you referring to? What was the date?

What don't know? Making stuff up as usual? Maybe you should change your name to habitual hater / liar.

What article on what what date. C'mon back up your nonsense.

BPD

P.S. I am talking about the specific article you referenced in the above post regarding possibly $1billion in EJ fines. (Yeah that will happen, when you stop using emoticons.)


BigPayDay,


Ask any of your IR's in CA, for not fully disclosing actual fees and commissions (FULL DISCLOSURE) it can be as much as a 25K FINE per infraction, and that is up to the Attorney general of California, and they do need money, and Edward Jones has been very arrogant to wards the state................ and how many transactions do you think Edward Jones had in California during the time period? Do the MATH........


Why do you think Edward Jones changed their Trade confirmations recently, to fully disclose Commissions and Fees, they were told years ago by CA to do it and they didn't


As for the article, on Monday i will get it from my office and tell the date and the paper, but I do have it, a X-Edward Jones IR from CA sent it to me.....I am sure since your home office is so forth right in telling you IR's in the field what is going on, you can email your home office and get copies of any and all articles, can't you?..........don't they share them with you?  Didn't they keep you aware when the SEC was investigating, OH they said they did nothing wrong and you bought it, didn't you?  I think you work for the liars....FACT


When you try to cover-up is that lying? 


Isn't that what Edward Jones is continuing to do by not fully telling you IR's in the field what is really going on?

Nov 25, 2005 1:43 am

Dude.....


Really if you went just a little easier on the emoticons you would have a whole lot more credibility and be a lot less annoying.....