Enforcement Actions
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
CASES OF NOTE
2009
NOTE: Stipulations of Fact and Consent to Penalty (SFC); Offers of Settlement (OS); and Letters of Acceptance Waiver, and Consent (AWC) are entered into by Respondents without admitting or denying the allegations, but consent is given to the described sanctions & to the entry of findings. Additionally, for AWCs, if FINRA has reason to believe a violation has occurred and the member or associated person does not dispute the violation, FINRA may prepare and request that the member or associated person execute a letter accepting a finding of violation, consenting to the imposition of sanctions, and agreeing to waive such member's or associated person's right to a hearing before a hearing panel, and any right of appeal to the National Adjudicatory Council, the SEC, and the courts, or to otherwise challenge the validity of the letter, if the letter is accepted. The letter shall describe the act or practice engaged in or omitted, the rule, regulation, or statutory provision violated, and the sanction or sanctions to be imposed.
November 2009 - View all for this month
Alan Frank Pacella
AWC/2007009934702
Pacella participated in the sale of unregistered securities. Before entering sales orders, Pacella relied on his member firm’s compliance department to review whether the shares were freely tradable. The compliance department conducted its tradability review in the ordinary course of business and incorrectly approved the securities for public resale, even though the shares were restricted. Pacella had or should have had the company’s Articles of Incorporation and press release, thereby allowing him to determine that the securities were not registered for public sale and not subject to an exemption.
Alan Frank Pacella: Censured; Fined $10,000
Bill Singer's Comment

I dunno about this one. Okay -- no question that an RR should undertake basic due diligence to determine whether shares that he or she are proposing to buy/sell are freely tradable/exempted.  However, when that same RR stands back from order entry and allows the compliance department to investigate the same issue and is given a "good to go" clearance, I'm not sure that the RR has violated any rules or regulations.  However, even assuming that I give FINRA the point that Pacella should have or could have determined the critical issue, I think that the facts as presented by the regulator don't support the imposition of a $10,000 fine. Seems to me that a Censure or even a Letter of Caution would have sufficed under these unusual circumstances.

Enforcement Actions
Search in Cases of Note : FINRA
Months
 
Cases of Note : FINRA Archive
Tags