The federal securities watchdog Financial Industry Regulatory Authority's recent actions reveal the agency's concerns with the outcome of money recoveries it awards consumers in securities cases before FINRA arbitration panels.
Everyone wants a sweet deal, and honesty would perhaps have most of us admit that our emotions start overriding our normal logical constraints when a third party begins pouring honey over a potential transaction.
There are myriad reasons why residents in California and elsewhere across the country turn to brokers and other third parties to make financial recommendations and manage their investment portfolios.
Clearly, no spa visit is worth a decades-long prison term.
The proverbial verdict is still out on the cryptocurrency bitcoin, which is still in its infancy.
Many of our California readers likely tracked news last year that focused on regulatory changes involving brokers' responsibilities to investors.
"[I]t doesn't appear to be happening," says a commentator in a recent article focused upon fraudulent financial schemes.
"[S]cammers scam and liars lie."
Given the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority's assessment that he "plundered," it was a virtual certainty that a disciplinary hearing conducted recently by a Finra panel would end up badly for a broker under a withering spotlight.
If you are like many other California residents who worked diligently to rebuild your portfolio after the Great Recession, you probably had to give your investment advisor a certain measure of trust. Perhaps everything went well for a while, but then you began to notice problems.