Left wachovia securities....retention question
29 RepliesJump to last post
Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it.
Unfortunately, I’ve seen this happen to a friend. He had an excellant case, a good lawyer and money in the bank…Unfortunately, contract law is contract law…you will spend tens of thousands of dollars, hours of time, and much angst defending yourself, and in the end you will STILL owe WS the money.
Pay it back, move on..[quote=mnbondguy]Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it. [/quote]
I’m talking about HIS contract, not yours. What did you see in HIS contract that makes you believe that his firm didn’t perform up to the terms of the contract.
Our experience: Group of four, plus 2 reg. asst., left AGE fall '07. That was before the retention money got paid the first (only????) time, so we didn't have any pay back issues. None of us are massive producers, all Crest Club at the time, so we were taking about 1.4 - 1.6mil of production out of the office, which represented probably 20%+- of the office at that time. Bottom line - WS/AGE came after us with determined vigor. P.M. for details. It all worked out ok, but it was a royal pain to deal with.Guys & Girls, little help here. I agree that while you may be able to negotiate the amount remaining on the retention, you will ultimately have to pay something back. My question revolves more around an entire branch that is wanting to move. Anyone had any experience with that, or with a branch where the bulk of the production left? Thanks.
Bondguy -
Fight them tooth and nail on what? The fact that they loaned you money? If you sign a promissory note, that's what you signed. It's not an employment agreement that binds you to perform, and them to provide certain services..... Again... It's a promissory note... a loan.... NOT an employment agreement. Any judge will evaluate the document on its merits, and you'll be held responsible for the terms. If you want to tell someone to duke it out, so be it... I think it's better for the attorney than it would be for the broker. Negotiate the best you can.... avoid litigation, period. Pay up and move on. Cwild speculation....what did you see in his contract?? I know a bit about contract law, I have been to court more then a few times, always as plaintiff...I have never lost. None of the cases have involved the securities business however.[quote=mnbondguy]Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it. [/quote]
I’m talking about HIS contract, not yours. What did you see in HIS contract that makes you believe that his firm didn’t perform up to the terms of the contract.
wild speculation....what did you see in his contract?? I know a bit about contract law, I have been to court more then a few times, always as plaintiff...I have never lost. None of the cases have involved the securities business however. [/quote][quote=Hank Moody] [quote=mnbondguy]Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it. [/quote]
I’m talking about HIS contract, not yours. What did you see in HIS contract that makes you believe that his firm didn’t perform up to the terms of the contract.
You are the one who claims that they are in violation of a contract. Of course, I've got you pegged for another idiot who runs his mouth with no knowledge to support what he says.
wild speculation....what did you see in his contract?? I know a bit about contract law, I have been to court more then a few times, always as plaintiff...I have never lost. None of the cases have involved the securities business however. [/quote][quote=mnbondguy][quote=Hank Moody] [quote=mnbondguy]Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it. [/quote]
I’m talking about HIS contract, not yours. What did you see in HIS contract that makes you believe that his firm didn’t perform up to the terms of the contract.
You are the one who claims that they are in violation of a contract. Of course, I've got you pegged for another idiot who runs his mouth with no knowledge to support what he says.
[/quote] I might be a dumbass, but I will bet you anything you want (how about 10k to your/my favorite chairty?), that my take home (after tax, health care cost, 401k costs etc), is more then you gross in commissions.....wanna bet? I bet my assistant makes twice what you make. DFk's like you have no chance for long term success in this industry. If there was no grey area in these contracts, these firms would never settle, yet they do. You are a rude little punk.
wild speculation....what did you see in his contract?? I know a bit about contract law, I have been to court more then a few times, always as plaintiff...I have never lost. None of the cases have involved the securities business however. [/quote][quote=Hank Moody] [quote=mnbondguy][quote=Hank Moody] [quote=mnbondguy]Not on a contract so I don’t no, but generally doesnt the firm have some sort of obligations to their brokers? WS especially did a lot of damage to their brokers books, money was fleeing out the door at such a fast pace that the fdic would have siezed them had it not been for the Citi deal, and no, I don’t think retail nows the difference between the bank and the brokerage side, even the ones that do, remember what happened to brokerage accounts at Lehman. I would be surprised if the contract would allow WS to run the place into the ground and not have some recourse for brokers…but maybe you would need a court to interpret it. [/quote]
I’m talking about HIS contract, not yours. What did you see in HIS contract that makes you believe that his firm didn’t perform up to the terms of the contract.
You are the one who claims that they are in violation of a contract. Of course, I've got you pegged for another idiot who runs his mouth with no knowledge to support what he says.
[/quote] I might be a dumbass, but I will bet you anything you want (how about 10k to your/my favorite chairty?), that my take home (after tax, health care cost, 401k costs etc), is more then you gross in commissions.....wanna bet? I bet my assistant makes twice what you make. DFk's like you have no chance for long term success in this industry. If there was no grey area in these contracts, these firms would never settle, yet they do. You are a rude little punk.[/quote]
Are you still mad at me for playing spin the bottle with your kids? Some of you bond guys are pretty big producers, but I'll definitely take the one where your assistant makes twice what I do. I'll even donate to NAMBLA, on your behalf.