MFDA Hearing Panel approves settlement agreement with Bradley Gascho
TORONTO, Aug. 14, 2018 /CNW/ - A settlement hearing in the matter of Bradley John Gascho ("Respondent") was held on July 31, 2018 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 approved the settlement agreement dated June 22, 2018 ("Settlement Agreement") between Staff of the MFDA and the Respondent, as a consequence of which the following sanctions were imposed on the Respondent:
- a prohibition from conducting securities related business in any capacity while in the employ of or associated with a MFDA Member for a period of three months;
- a fine in the amount of $35,000, payable in six monthly instalments of $5,833.33 each, commencing one month from the date of acceptance of the Settlement Agreement;
- costs in the amount of $5,000; and
- in the future shall comply with MFDA Rule 2.1.1 and 2.2.1.
In the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent admitted that:
| a) |
between 2002 and March 18 2016, he recommended to at least 73 clients that the clients concentrate at least 25% of their investment holdings in gold and/or precious metals sector funds, without conducting adequate due diligence to assess the suitability of his investment recommendations, having regard to the essential KYC factors relevant to each individual client, including the client's age, risk tolerance, ability to withstand investment losses, and investment knowledge and experience, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; |
| b) |
between September 2007 and November 2014, he misrepresented, failed to fully and adequately explain, or omitted to explain the risks and benefits of investing in gold or precious metals sector funds to a senior client, WA, thereby failing to ensure his recommendations were suitable for client WA, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; |
| c) |
In July 2015, he increased the risk tolerance of a senior client, EJ, on her account forms in order to ensure that the KYC information for client EJ matched his investment recommendations to concentrate a substantial portion of client EJ's investment holdings in gold or precious metals sector funds, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; |
| d) |
Between September 2007 and November 2014, he failed to use due diligence to learn and accurately record the essential KYC factors relative to a senior client, WA, prior to making investment recommendations, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; and |
| e) |
Between September 2007 and November 2014, he failed to use due diligence to ensure that each recommendation made to a senior client, WA, was suitable for client WA, when he recommended that client WA concentrate her investment holdings in gold and precious metals sector funds, 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 in Kitchener, Ontario.
The MFDA is the self-regulatory organization for Canadian mutual fund dealers, regulating the operations, standards of practice and business conduct of its Members and their approximately 82,000 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
please contact: Charles Toth, Director, Litigation, 416-943-4619, [email protected]
Share this article