u5/ Brokercheck Question

17 replies [Last post]
LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

I was terminated from my position at a bank. I am wondering how long this termination will stay on my U5 and on Brokercheck. The site says that information will be posted on brokercheck after 2 years if it is regulatory event. I am not sure if this qualifies as that. I dont have anything on my report except a termination. I am not planning on being in the industry and I am worried that having this kind of information available about me on the internet could hurt my chances of employment even in non securities related industries. here is what my Brokercheck report reads: TERMINATED BY AFFILIATE BANK- NON SECURITES RELATED.  Will my report still be viewable after 2 years of not being registered or will this be visible online forever? Thanks!

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

I am sorry to say that I believe these are permanent.  It is not fair, but I believe that is the way it is.  You can look at anyone's Broker Check.  For example, some guys in my office had very stupid stuff still on their report years (10) after they occurred.  Good luck, I think with the right firm you will be OK.  I am sorry they felt the need to put that on your permanent record.

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

I am more concerned about this showing up on background checks for non-securites related industries, is that realistic or is that not looked at unless it is a broker? I got the impression from the finra site that 2 years after being not registered the only things that would be there would be if i had a regulatory event filed against me, not just a termination. 

loneMADman's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-05-10

I truly believe that if you are looking for work outside the securities industry and this is simply a termination not related to a criminal offense, you have nothing to worry about.  If you are losing sleep over it, contact a securities lawyer and put the issue to bed. 

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

Its a termination for a violation of company policy. It wasnt securities related at all and there was no criminal offense at all. 

JIMRICH's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-19

I understand after several  futile searches of FINRA site and calling FINRA for help and getting thrown into their circular system that FINRA does not help Brokers. The system is set up against the Broker.   I learned that  ANY comments the employer puts on a CRD are::

  • *  Permanent.  FOREVER!
  • *  The comments drop off of Broker Check after 2 year and are no longer visible to the public eye. 
  • *  If you go back into the industry and get reregistered the comments will appear again.
  • *  If one leaves the industry, starts over, retakes the exams etc.,  the comments will reappear. 
  • *  I understand if you made broker comments, that your efforts will disappear from your record when your CRD  
  •    drops off the Broker Check after 2 years.
  • *  If you get back in the industry, the negative comments will be put back on your CRD even if you left for awhile
  •    and started over years later.  You will have to do the broker comments again.... and again... and again... and  
  •    again.

This is true for ANY comments your past employer chooses to put on your CRD.  It does not matter if the comments are true or false.  FINRA does NOT check and NO PROOF is needed!  Even if you are investigated and FINRA found that you did not involve a customer, absolutely NO HARM done to any person; or found that it was just an event between you and your company, or a personal event between you and a boss that did not like you; the comments STILL go on your CRD.....FOREVER!No, it is not fair.  It is grossly unjust.  This does not occur in any other industry!What I have learned, is we can go through Arbitration to try and to rid the comments.  It is a crap shoot EVEN if you did not do anything major or minor, even if you were misrerpresented.   We can go Pro SE, represent ourselves or hire an attorney and fork out big bucks $$$$.   They, FINRA and others, will get their arbitration dollars, regardless.  They do not care about you as a person.  FINRA appears to be a $$ machine.Because of this unjust handling of employment disputes, I highly recommend that you and all reps join a reputable firm that cares about you.    Interview them with a frenzy!  Do not take the job because you are desperate.  We need to put character and integrity back into our work environment.  To do so, takes courage and do NOT settle for less!  Good companines run by good people are out there!  Be selective.  Demand civil treatment of human beings!BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL who you pick as your employer!!!!!.   For all who read this,  Do NOT join a bank  (especially the big so called successful one) for they are the worse due to the contradictory culture of banking side vs the investment side and the politics will raise its head and you will suffer. Bottom line and back to the person inquiring, if you get out of the industry, after 2 years this should not affect you.  There is no reason for a non industry employer to view a CRD, U4/U5... Just move on!   

riing's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-17

I am more concerned about this showing up on background checks for
non-securites related industries, is that realistic or is that not
looked at unless it is a broker? I got the impression from the finra
site that 2 years after being not registered the only things that would
be there would be if i had a regulatory event filed against me, not just
a termination. Brett Favre Jersey

necoo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-24

I truly believe that if you are looking for work outside the securities
industry and this is simply a termination not related to a criminal
offense, you have nothing to worry about.  If you are losing sleep over
it, contact a securities lawyer and put the issue to bed.

ucdavis2000's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-11-19

Sorry to inform you, but broker check rules have been changed and now there is no drop off after two years.  All the files are back up and ready to download. Not very fair.

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

If I was to receive an offer for employment from a different back that didn't require licensing, would it be in my best interest to not tell them I am licensed, and just let them expire, or is there a rule that requires me to inform them? 

BigFirepower's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-07-09

LBJ, always be honest. It just doesn't pay, catches up to you otherwise. The new bank is very likely to do a pretty good background check, and if they find something of material importance that you didn't mention, that's a big problem. Worse yet, years from now, that might catch up with you. Address the issue, head on. If you don't mind me/us asking, what was the issue that led to your termination?

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

I admitted to looking at another employee's account info w/out business reason to do so. With a prospective bank seeing that, I dont see any way they would look past it, so i feel like the only option is to not tell them about it. I have no desire to actually use the licenses or go into the securities area of the bank so I feel like it might be best to just omit them.

BigFirepower's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-07-09

At my last bank, they could have fired every last one of those dang bankers over that one... Well, in any event, if you apply to work at another bank, wouldn't you expect the new employer to contact your former employer? I'd suggest that you at least be prepared to discuss the event, in a way that comes across reasonable. I know a gal at my former bank, and she was terminated for some mistake. It was tough for her to get work in another bank, the reference checking was a problem. But, eventually she got work at a local credit union.

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

The reference checking wont be an issue, as the bank i previously worked for only gives dates of employment. Also, my old manager was upset about me being fired and will still give me a good reference, and not mention that. I do get that it is best to be honest, and I was honest in admitting I did look at someones account, and that got me fired. The only way the new bank would find out is if they pull up my u5 or go to brokercheck. I feel like once I get hired, the issue will be put to bed because the licenses will expire, and I can move on. I don't like being dishonest either but it seems like the only option....

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

I also am curious if there is some legal issue with me not reporting my registration to a different bank? The bank I am applying to does not require licenses, so would that be an issue or is it required that I report it?

stockattorney's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-09-09

I just want to be clear, when you check BrokerCheck on the FINRA site, that is the comment that comes up?  OR is that the comment that is stated on the copy of the Form U5 you received and BrokerCheck shows nothing?If the former, then the BD filed the Form U5 with a YES answer which prompts a disclosure reporting page (DRP).  This disclosure is permanent.  If the latter then the comment will never be accessible on BrokerCheck (under current policies) unless a state regulator provides the full CRD report upon an individual request (e.g., Florida Office of Financial Regulation will give a customer a rep's full CRD for the asking, which includes archived disclosures!).   

LBJ6's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-08-08

Its definitely visible on brokercheck. I have looked. I think the best course of action for me is to forget that I am even licensed, let it expire, and hope the bank I am going to work for doesn't look on brokercheck or pull my u5. According to finra after 10 years it wont be visible on brokercheck. 

efmc2012's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-09-15

I was curious about this subject. I know someone who was fired from his firm because he was often tardy and who clocked himself in with a timecard. His firm caught wind of this and fired him for "falsification of timecard". Is this something that, in your opinion, would keep him from getting hired in a registered position? When he approached this firm and begged them to notate that his termination was "non-securities-related" in nature, they refused, saying that if they did this for him, then they must do this for everyone. As a result, prospective firms see his U-5 and turn him down because of it. Do any of you know of anyone who had a similar event and was able to be placed eventually at another firm?

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×