IIROC is addressing concerns that panel decisions in two recent cases expose inconsistencies in advisor sanctions.
IIROC issued a press release this week trumpeting the settlement agreement its staff reached with a Toronto-area advisor, which includes a five-year suspension from registration involving a breach with a single client.
Also this week the OSC moved to apply a ban on an advisor, overturning an IIROC panel decision that would have allowed the wealth professional to stay on the job.
Ironically, in that second case, IIROC staff had recommended the panel ban the advisor, guilty of indirectly funnelling client monies into second mortgages without the knowledge of her firm while also failing to disclose to clients a conflict of interest.
In that other case where IIROC applied a five-year suspension, the advisor was found to have made unsuitable investment recommendations to only one client while also performing discretionary trading on that client’s accounts without approval from his employers.
Some advisors are telling WP they don’t understand the discrepancy in IIROC panel decisions they point to a $2.9 million loss for several clients associated with the advisor IIROC was prepared to let go without a suspension. The advisor that was handed a five-year ban managed a client’s portfolio worth $2 million.
IIROC is now addressing those concerns, telling WP it can’t comment on specific enforcement cases or decisions, but there are guidelines in place which provide a framework for determining sanctions. The specifics of which IIROC determines on a case-by-case basis.
“IIROC is guided by its Sanction Guidelines which provide a principles-based approach to sanctioning and ensure that a variety of factors are considered on a case-by-case basis,” said Elsa Renzella, IIROC Vice President, Enforcement. “The Hearing Panel reviews the facts of each case to determine the sanction.”
See more: OSC gets tough on IIROC advisors
Also this week the OSC moved to apply a ban on an advisor, overturning an IIROC panel decision that would have allowed the wealth professional to stay on the job.
Ironically, in that second case, IIROC staff had recommended the panel ban the advisor, guilty of indirectly funnelling client monies into second mortgages without the knowledge of her firm while also failing to disclose to clients a conflict of interest.
In that other case where IIROC applied a five-year suspension, the advisor was found to have made unsuitable investment recommendations to only one client while also performing discretionary trading on that client’s accounts without approval from his employers.
Some advisors are telling WP they don’t understand the discrepancy in IIROC panel decisions they point to a $2.9 million loss for several clients associated with the advisor IIROC was prepared to let go without a suspension. The advisor that was handed a five-year ban managed a client’s portfolio worth $2 million.
IIROC is now addressing those concerns, telling WP it can’t comment on specific enforcement cases or decisions, but there are guidelines in place which provide a framework for determining sanctions. The specifics of which IIROC determines on a case-by-case basis.
“IIROC is guided by its Sanction Guidelines which provide a principles-based approach to sanctioning and ensure that a variety of factors are considered on a case-by-case basis,” said Elsa Renzella, IIROC Vice President, Enforcement. “The Hearing Panel reviews the facts of each case to determine the sanction.”
See more: OSC gets tough on IIROC advisors
