MFDA Hearing Panel accepts Settlement Agreement with William Adams
TORONTO, March 18, 2015 /CNW/ - A Settlement Hearing in the matter of William Morris Adams (the "Respondent") was held on March 9, 2015 in Toronto, Ontario before a three-member Hearing Panel of the Central Regional Council of the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada ("MFDA"). The Hearing Panel accepted the Settlement Agreement ("Settlement Agreement") between Staff of the MFDA and the Respondent, as a consequence of which the Respondent:
- has paid a fine in the amount of $17,500;
- has paid costs of in the amount of $7,500;
- shall successfully complete an industry compliance course acceptable to the MFDA within six (6) months of the date that the Settlement Agreement is accepted by the Hearing Panel; and
- shall in future comply with all MFDA By-laws, Rules and Policies, and all applicable securities legislation and regulations.
In the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent admitted that:
| a) |
between October 2008 and December 2008, he signed new account opening documents as the mutual fund salesperson responsible for the accounts of at least 12 clients, without having ever met with the clients, thereby failing to perform the necessary due diligence to learn the essential facts relative to the clients and failing to observe high standards of ethics and practice in the conduct of business, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; and |
|
| b) |
between March 2007 and August 2008, he obtained blank, pre-signed new account opening forms and investment loan applications from at least 13 clients, which he forwarded to a third party to complete and submit to the Member in order to open accounts for the clients and implement a leveraged investment strategy in the accounts, and in so doing: |
|
| i. |
facilitated an arrangement whereby the third party populated the new account opening documents and investment loan applications with client information which was false, incorrect or misleading, thereby failing to observe high standards of ethics and conduct in the transaction of business and engaging in conduct unbecoming an Approved Person, contrary to MFDA Rule 2.1.1; and |
|
| ii. |
failed to ensure that the leveraged investment strategy was suitable for the clients and in keeping with the clients' investment objectives, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1. |
|
A copy of the Settlement Agreement is available on the MFDA website at www.mfda.ca. During the period described in the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent carried on business out of a branch office located in Ottawa, Ontario.
The MFDA is the self-regulatory organization for Canadian mutual fund dealers, regulating the operations, standards of practice and business conduct of its 105 Members and their approximately 80,000 Approved Persons with a mandate to protect investors and the public interest. For more information about the MFDA's complaint and enforcement processes, as well as links to 'Check an Advisor' and other Investor Tools, visit the For Investors page on the MFDA website.
SOURCE Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada
Hugh Corbett, Managing Director, Enforcement, 416-943-4685, [email protected]
Share this article