Good grief...what a blockhead you are!
Charlie Brown wrote:Good grief...what a blockhead you are!I do realize what I did was very stupid. But I would appreciate something that might actually help me. If you are going to say get out of the industry or anything like that I would just assume you could please keep those comments to yourself as they will not help me. Thank you to anyone who could say something some what beneficial to me.
There are two threads? See other post. Don't panic.
In response to some queries from a number of you, I would suggest that you read http://www.brokeandbroker.com/index.php?a=blog&id=423 for a similar situation in which an RR "accidentally" disclosed confidential customer information -- no, not exactly the same scenario as in this thread but you should at least get the gist of why this issue is presently a concern for member firms and a hot button for regulators. Frankly, given how unique your fact pattern is and all the details that you have disclosed online, you're really not helping yourself out by making such public issue of your situation. You would have been better advised to contact an industry lawyer and privately discuss your case.While it would appear that this is not a major violation or the likely grist for an arbitration, you really need to stop posting about your case. You are only taking a minor blip and doing everything possible to call attention to it. Bill Singer
Good advice, I'm sure.Bill, if I take it from your post that an assistant who is a registered rep bears full responsibility for actions - if any rr keeps a spreadsheet on their desktop (which is likely a violation of internal compliance policy), and then mistakenly sends it out, there is no "recourse". (likely grist.)
Bill, easy on the fella. Either way, this crap, or the job for the matter, isn't the end of his world. Sounds like he's a 20 sumthin, and shouldn't consider the hot leaded mouth pipe just yet...
Ha. I heard a commentator the other day, talking about how only the big guys get scrutinized. (Little guys just get canned.)I'm sticking with my suggestion to talk to a junior labor lawyer at a big firm. You were just plain treated badly. Ask Jr. if he will work on contingency. Big is right, there are a lot of things to feel bad and **** your pants about, this isn't one of them. Fight back, but move on, like BG says. It's always better to resign and not have the mark than to be fired and have a bad taste. A nice severance and unemployment would be good too. Don't feel paranoid about what you shared here, we Americans and we have rights. Whatever happens, you are a good person and things will turn out all right. I feel ashamed to be associated with an industry that gets to treat you this way, this country is becoming way too PC.
The big guys can do whatever they want. That's why it's SELF REGULATORY. I can't imagine that you could resign as they probably won't give you that option. It all depends on who you are. Several people in my office made unauthorized trades, forged signatures & one even EXPOSED private parts to us but they don't have a ding on their U4. Depends on your BM. God Bless & Good luck. I pray you don't need it.
TenthTee:You write: .<<Bill, if I take it from your post that an assistant who is a registered rep bears full responsibility for actions - if any rr keeps a spreadsheet on their desktop (which is likely a violation of internal compliance policy), and then mistakenly sends it out, there is no "recourse". (likely grist.)>>I'm sure that when you read my commentary on the curbside records case that you likely detected more than a bit of sarcasm from me about how that became such a major case. While I fully appreciate the concern for confidentiality (and I support it), I'm not sure that the circumstances of the curbside case really required such harsh treatment by the regulators. Moreover, the asinine suggestion that the member firm needed to have pointed written supervisory procedures that should have warned RRs against leaving customer records on the street is moronic, to say the least. The RR goofed. He should be sanctioned. No question about it. However, why the firm was charged for such an obvious lapse of judgment by its employee seems punitive. In case anyone forgot, a few years ago, NASD/FINRA's Florida offices were broken into and supposedly confidential laptops were stolen. I don't recall the regulators being fined.As to whether the kid in this thread is "fully" or "partially" responsible is a nuance that I don't know that I would trouble myself with, if I were a regulator. Clearly, the transmission to a third party of such confidential information is a mistake and a violation. Does he need to be "punished" if the transmission was merely an error? I think a mild reprimand might suffice -- even a mere Letter of Caution rather than a fine and/or suspension. What will likely be determinative for a regulator if it gets that far is what, if any, steps were taken to protect the data and what explanation is given as to why it was transmitted.
BigFirepower:You wrote: <<Bill, easy on the fella. Either way, this crap, or the job for the matter, isn't the end of his world. Sounds like he's a 20 sumthin, and shouldn't consider the hot leaded mouth pipe just yet...>>I'm not sure I understand what I wrote that you would infer that I am being "tough" on the kid. I simply posted a link to an article about a similar fact pattern and warned him to stop posting details and admissions against his interest.As a frequent industry defense lawyer and former regulatory lawyer with NASD and AMEX, you're just going to have to trust me when I say that I am not being tough on the poster but simply being honest with him. Assuming that I take him at his word that he just make an inadvertent error, fine, he goofed and I do that myself numerous times a day. That's why there are erasers on pencils. On the other hand, in these post-9/11 days of Patriot Act and Reg S-P, the disclosure of confidential customer information is viewed far more seriously by the regulatory community than a decade or so ago. Moreover, the transmission of such data may prompt the customers involved to complain to the firm about the breach, if not sue for damages. Unintentional mistake or not, this could cause a big problem for the member firm and if it doesn't take prompt, decisive action then it has to explain everything to the regulators and also justify its supervision in who knows how many arbitrations or court trials.The other issue that you need to appreciate is that if someone says that "I mistakenly sent 18 confidential customer files with their social security numbers to a Tibetan Piggybank manufacturer in Little Town, Rhode Island and I am a Norwegian stockbroker who started work at XYZ Broker Dealer in Boston, MA on May 12, 2007, "that it's not all that difficult for folks to figure out exactly who has posted the question. Further, the poster has admitted to the act and to his mistake, which may negatively impact the future defense of the kid. My concern, going forward, is that he simply stop posting commentary that could be used against him. Ultimately, he sounds like a decent kid and hopefully has learned some important life lessons from this mess. In the future, he should probably ask for a referral to an industry lawyer or call up his state's fee lawyer referral service and get a free or fixed-rate initial consultation with a competent lawyer. If he can't afford a lawyer, then he should learn for the future that he has provided online in this forum far too much background about himself and made far too many admissions against his interest at this stage of things.Sometimes the worst thing that we can do with young folks is to make light of serious matters or pretend that "intent" is always a defense against screwing up. The key takeaway here is not to never make a mistake in the future -- because no human can learn such a lesson -- but the important thing for this young poster is to immediately seek out professional counsel or to privately speak with a veteran broker and find out how to best handle these things. Having grown up texting and using computers, a lot of kids don't realize that there are some things that you should not post online for the whole world to read. That's tough love, but with an emphasis on "love."
Thanks, great perspective, Bill. You're just the messenger, and a good one, but it's totally absurd that a young man who is biding the work of broker pushes the wrong button and needs to seek specialized counsel to defend his right to support his family by working. Pay for that counsel while suffering a loss of wages that was being used to subsidize a first generation pizza restaurant. Maybe his unemployment insurance is messed up by the firing. Even if the story is different, the facts are substantially the same. There was another thread here recently about how young people find it difficult to become established in the industry. If I was this young man, I would consider running as hard and far away as possible from continuing a career in the histrionic self serving b/d world. Better to sell pizzas for cash. A lesson for all young people; seek to have control in your work. I can tell you, this story does not make me want to take the risk go out and hire a licensed junior RR for my own small practice, because if firing this guy is the appropriate solution I would have found another way and I fear it may have taken me down. Even if it could be resolved by spending ten thousand bucks in legal fees, you gotta be kidding.
Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×