admin

Jim Eccleston: Morgan Stanley Suffers Big Asset Loss

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law:

The nation’s largest brokerage by adviser head count, Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, lost $8.4 billion in client assets during the third quarter, as some of its major producers took their business to competing firms. In the three-month period ended September 30, 2013, the average assets under management of advisers who moved also jumped nearly 25% from the previous year, to $402.2 million. Generally speaking, adviser movement with small books of businesses is not tracked by the data, and advisers do not necessarily take all of their business to the new firm.

Four of the 10 largest departures from Morgan Stanley in the third quarter were to other wirehouses. Three teams managing $7.9 billion in assets moved to UBS Financial Services Inc., while a $1 billion team in the New York area switched to Wells Fargo Advisors LLC.Morgan Stanley did add some major advisers last quarter. However, high-profile losses appeared to offset Morgan Stanley’s recruitment successes last quarter.

Given that Morgan Stanley had 16,321 advisers and $1.8 trillion in assets at the end of the second quarter, according to the company’s regulatory filings, it still is the largest wirehouse by advisers and the second largest by assets.

The attorneys of Eccleston Law represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Jim Eccleston: B-Ds Up and Running on Social Media

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law:
As technology improves and compliance fears ease, advisers at brokerage firms are joining their registered investment adviser counterparts in the social-media race. Contrary to registered investment advisers (RIAs), many broker-dealers have and continue to require preapproval of personal messages, or limit posts to canned corporate material. FINRA does not require preapproval of social-media posts, and better technology / compliance tools are easing fears.
For example, Cambridge Investment Research Inc. lets its representatives post on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook, subject to a post-use review. Further, Commonwealth Financial Network also allows its representatives to use LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook. At LPL Financial, approximately 5,000 of the firm’s advisers, or about 40% of the total, are signed up to use social media. As of August 2013, that number was up almost 60%. Further, Raymond James advisers can use Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, but content has to be preapproved. Close to 2,000 of Raymond James’ 5,300 advisers in its independent and employee channels have connected through special software. Moreover, Bank of America Merrill Lynch allows its reps to use LinkedIn only. Lastly, Wells Fargo has had a LinkedIn pilot program in place since September 2013 in which about 50 of its advisers can post content. Meanwhile, the firm has gotten about a third of its 15,000 reps to put up a profile on LinkedIn.

The attorneys of Eccleston Law represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters. Our attorneys draw on a combined experience of nearly 50 years in delivering the highest quality legal services.
Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Jim Eccleston: FINRA Provides Additional Guidance for Financial Services Firms to Comply with New Suitability Rule | Advisor

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law:
FINRA (the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) has had an opportunity to examine how financial services firms are complying with FINRA Rule 2111, effective July, 2012. The new rule made several important changes, especially related to recommendations of investment strategies and recommendations to hold securities positions. Based upon examinations of firms conducted during the last year, FINRA has issued Regulatory Notice 13-31. Let’s highlight the key provisions.

As background, Rule 2111 relates to recommendations made by a financial adviser and his or her firm. Historically, the application of the rule was limited to recommendations to buy or sell securities. In the new rule, FINRA added recommended investment strategies involving a security or securities, including the explicit recommendation to “hold” a security or securities.

Also, in making a recommendation, Rule 2111 continues with the requirement that the financial adviser and his or her firm have a “reasonable basis” to believe that the recommendation is “suitable.” However, the new rule added several requirements. First, FINRA expanded the list of information required to ascertain the customer’s suitability profile. The list includes the customer’s age, investment experience, time horizon, liquidity needs and risk tolerance as information items that advisers and their firms must attempt to obtain and analyze.

Second, the new rule recited the “three main suitability obligations” according to Regulatory Notice 13-31. They are “reasonable-basis”, “customer-specific” and “quantitative” suitability obligations. In short, reasonable basis means that a recommended security or investment recommendation is suitable for at least some investors; customer-specific means that the recommendation is suitable for a particular customer; and quantitative means that “a series of recommended transactions, even if suitable when viewed in isolation, are not excessive.”

In light of the new requirements of the suitability rule, FINRA examiners have analyzed the firms’ “controls”, including testing the firms’ supervisory and compliance systems. FINRA examiners also have reviewed for “Red Flags” of possible deficiencies. Those Red Flags include: a long term investment for an investor with a short term time horizon; or a speculative investment or strategy held in the account of a conservative investor. FINRA concludes in its regulatory notice that the most common deficiency among firms was having inadequate procedures for “hold” recommendations.

Based upon those examinations, Regulatory Notice 13-31 discusses numerous “observations of effective practices” to provide guidance to firms and their advisers. For example, in the guidance regarding reasonable-basis suitability, FINRA commented on an effective way some firms use to ensure that their financial advisers understand the (sometimes complex) products that they are recommending. Those firms “post due diligence on products (and accompanying documents) to an internal website that [advisers] can access when recommending a product.” The information “includes audited financial statements, notes of interviews with key individuals of the product sponsor or issuer, and other information relevant to understanding the product and its features.”

Likewise, in the guidance related to customer-specific suitability, FINRA comments that some firms bolstered compliance by requiring specific customer suitability information such as high risk tolerance, low liquidity needs, substantial investment experience, and an indication that the recommended transaction represents a small percentage of a balanced portfolio.

Finally, the guidance regarding investment strategies and hold recommendations is notable. FINRA notes that effective compliance and supervisory systems included the following:

• A “hold ticket” or “hold blotter” that captures hold and, in certain instances, other types of strategy recommendations;
• Notes of discussions with clients regarding explicit hold or other strategy recommendations by associated persons maintained in customer files;
• Firm branch office inspections focused on the documentation of hold and other strategy conversations with clients;
• Modified new account forms to include specific investment strategies (determined by the firm) which could be identified if an adviser recommends them at the time of the account opening;
• New or amended account opening forms that must be signed by the customer when advisers recommend changes to a previously recommended account investment strategy; and
• A prohibition on advisers’ engaging firm clients in any business activity that an adviser conducts outside of his or her firm.

Although FINRA states that Rule 2111 generally does not impose explicit documentation requirements, some documentation likely is necessary for adequate supervision. The regulatory notice states, “The type or form of documentation that may be needed is dependent on the facts and circumstances of the investment strategy or hold recommendation, including the complexity and risks associated with the security or investment strategy at the time of the recommendation.” Firms must find a way “to capture hold and other strategy recommendations.”
As one can see, Regulatory Notice 13-31 contains a great deal of helpful guidance for firms to implement to ensure that recommendations are suitable.

The attorneys of Eccleston Law represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters. Our attorneys draw on a combined experience of nearly 50 years in delivering the highest quality legal services.
Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Jim Eccleston: Investors who Bought Small Business Administration sold by Morgan Keegan & Co. Might Have a Claim

Between February 2008 and April 2009, Morgan Keegan & Co. (“Morgan Keegan”) was allegedly in the business of purchasing small business loans from across the country, pooling them together, and then reselling tranches of those pools to institutional investors.  However, during that same time, the demand for these securities was falling.  Morgan Keegan’s inventory levels continued to rise since it allegedly directed its Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Desk to sell of a large portion of the inventory.  The desk allegedly entered a number of fictitious trades in an effort to artificially reduce the amount of SBA loans that the firm was holding.  The SBA Desk then allegedly repeatedly manipulated the settlement dates, pushing back the date the fake trades were supposed to close in order to prevent the fraud from being uncovered.

As a result of this misconduct, it is likely that anyone who purchased these SBA loan securities from Morgan Keegan during this time period did so under false pretenses.  In particular, Morgan Keegan allegedly masked the difficulty finding buyers for these securities by making false trades, which convinced customers that these SBA loans were far more liquid than they actually were.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Wirehouses and Regional Broker-Dealers Starting to Look More Like RIAs

Wirehouses and regional firms rapidly are adopting fee-based compensation models and focusing more on financial planning than ever before, which are two characteristics that registered investment advisors (“RIAs”) have long used to separate themselves from the bigger players.  What made RIAs unique for many years is no longer the case.  According to Cogent Research LLC, by 2016, asset-based fees are expected to make up 70% of wirehouse compensation, which is up from 58% last year.  At regional firms, asset-based fees are expected to grow to 57%, which is up from 42% last year.

Wirehouses and regional firms are shifting away from the traditional commission-based model for several reasons, including securing a more predictable revenue stream.  However, the primary reason is that wealthy clients want it.  At all four majors, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS AG and Wells Fargo & Co., there is a big push to do financial planning.  For example, UBS Wealth Management Americas pulled in more than $3 million in the first half by charging an average of $4,100 for a financial plan, which is up from $1.4 million during all of 2012.  In addition, the regionals are getting in on the action.  Raymond James Financial Inc. elevated its financial planning capabilities with the launch of its Global Planning and Monitoring software last year.

The changes at bigger firms means that there will be greater challenges ahead for independent RIAs as the lines between the different options becomes less clear to clients.  According to Cogent, there continues to be one clear distinction.  Three out of five RIAs do independent research and customized portfolios while less than half of advisers at wirehouses and regionals do the same.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Recruiting Packages Predicted to Remain at Soaring Levels for Years to Come

Wall Street has been offering sky-high signing bonuses to attract top producers for a long time.  Specifically, the wirehouses pay anywhere from 100% to 150% in up-front signing bonuses.  Total packages can get to around 300% for top performers in front- and back-end bonuses.

Mark Elzweig, president of executive search firm Mark Elzweig Co., anticipates that the shrinking and aging advisor population is the fundamental driver behind these mega-deals.  In particular, Cerulli Associates forecasts that the number of advisors across all channels will fall to 297,515 by the end of 2016, down from 316,109 in 2011.  Since advisors are retiring and leaving the business faster than trainees can replace them, Cerulli predicts that advisor headcount at the wirehouses will decline by 2.4% a year as their sales forces either retire or join firms in other retail channels.

In Mr, Elzweig’s view, while wirehouse recruiting packages will remain at their current high levels for the foreseeable future, they have essentially peaked.  To ensure that they earn a good return on their enormous recruiting packages, the wirehouses typically require nine- or 10-year commitments through forgivable loan agreements (and other provisions, which our attorneys negotiate on behalf of reps).  Some advisors accept less money up front in exchange for shorter contracts.  Others seriously consider going independent or moving on to another non-wirehouse channel.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

LPL Reps Forced to Pay More For Supervision As Broker-Dealer Eliminates Self-Supervision

Due to a new industry regulation, LPL Financial LLC (“LPL”) is eliminating their independent reps’ ability to act as their own supervisors and imposing a fee increase on those 2,200 one-person shops.  In particular, the latest restructuring of compliance and oversight at LPL will add a $4,800 fee increase in 2015 for reps who choose to be supervised by LPL’s home office.  Alternatively, reps can choose to be supervised by an existing, qualified office of supervisory jurisdiction (“OSJ”).  Those reps will pay 4% to 30% of gross fees and commissions.

2013 has not been the best year for LPL in terms of compliance and oversight.  In February, LPL agreed to pay a $500,000 fine and $2.2 million in restitution for failing to properly supervise brokers selling non-traded REITs.  Also, in May, FINRA fined LPL $7.5 million for e-mail violations, the largest ever fine meted out by the regulator over e-mail compliance.  LPL Spokeswoman, Betsy Weinberger, stated that a coming rule revision by FINRA is one of the factors pushing LPL to make this change.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

SEC Approves FINRA Proposal to Release More Disciplinary Data

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) will approve FINRA’s proposal to provide more public information about brokers who are the subject of complaints and disciplinary actions.  Specifically, the proposal allows FINRA to release publicly a copy of any disciplinary complaint or decision it issues, including the names of the parties in the matter.  The majority of pending FINRA complaints against registered representatives and firms are disclosed in summary form in FINRA’s BrokerCheck system.

FINRA now will be permitted to release more details through monthly notices and in its online system for reporting disciplinary actions.  Some disciplinary information currently not permitted to be disclosed by FINRA is available on BrokerCheck, including unredacted summaries of FINRA moves.  Critics, however, are wary of the latitude that FINRA now has to include in its monthly reports and database complaints that the organization has filed against registered reps.

Reps who believe that any complaints and disciplinary actions contain false or exaggerated allegations now will have an even greater incentive to see to challenge the accuracy of those filings and/or seek to clarify the language of those filings.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Shaffer Wealth Becomes First Firm to Join HT Network

Shaffer Wealth Management has become the first financial advisory firm to join the HighTower Network, which is a platform that gives breakaway advisers access to the RIA partnership’s resources but allows them to maintain control over their practices. HighTower Advisors LLC has used the business model of buying advisers’ practices with upfront money and equity in the HighTower partnership. Also, the firm is one of the fastest-growing RIAs in the country. Specifically, they manage more than $20 billion in assets.

The HighTower Network offers advisers the same platform and resources that regular advisers with the firm get but with full ownership. This relationship is governed by a services agreement so network advisers have full access to HighTower’s capabilities. However, they receive no equity in HighTower and keep full control over their firms. HighTower Alliance’s model offers advisers even more independence, allowing them to handle more of the day-to-day operations of their firms while accessing HighTower’s investment platform and broker-dealer services. Shaffer Wealth Management is the fifth adviser team to join HighTower this year and the 13th team to join the past 12 months.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments

Allied Beacon’s Financial Health in Question

Allied Beacon Partners Inc. (“Allied Beacon”) has informed its financial advisers that the firm is in violation of industry rules requiring that sufficient capital be kept on hand to remain open for business.  Reps no longer can buy securities for their clients.  Reps can execute unsolicited sales of securities for clients looking to cash out of positions.

Allied Beacon is the legacy broker-dealer for at least two broker-dealers that went out of business over the past few years after being hit with investor lawsuits over fraudulent private placements.  One of those investor complaints filed in 2010 was against Community Bankers Securities, LLC.  In a decision rendered by a FINRA panel, Allied Beacon was ordered to pay a $1.6 claim stemming from the complaint.  Specifically, claimants made numerous allegations, including that the firm failed to conduct due diligence related to selling private placements of what turned out to be Ponzi schemes.

“A rep called me and said the firm was closed due to a net-capital violation as told to him from the back office of the broker-dealer,” said Jon Henschen, an industry recruiter, told Investment News.  “Allied Beacon’s story shows a repeating theme of smaller firms taking on more risk with alternative investments to attract reps to join, but having a lack of capital to cover those risks when arbitrations occur,” said Mr. Henschen.  Further, Allied Beacon’s role as the distributing broker-dealer for a new non-traded REIT, United Realty Trust Inc. is an issue.  Specifically, the REIT will change dealer-managers to another broker-dealer, Cabot Lodge Securities LLC.  This change, however, has been occurring prior to the net-cap violation.

Eccleston Law can help Allied Beacon reps nationwide ensure a smooth transition to a new firm.

Posted by admin in Blog Posts, 0 comments