fine-gavel-courtroom

On July 7, 2015, a hearing panel of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada accepted a settlement agreement, with sanctions, between IIROC staff and Geraldine Mannings.

IIROC says Mannings admitted she made unsuitable recommendations regarding the purchase and holding of securities in several clients’ accounts. Specifically, according to the settlement agreement, Mannings admitted to the following violations:

  • between approximately January 2012 and June 30, 2013, Mannings failed to use due diligence to ensure that the recommendations that she made in relation to the accounts of one client were suitable, contrary to IIROC Dealer Member Rule 1300.1(q); and
  • between approximately January 2012 and June 30, 2013, Mannings failed to use due diligence to ensure that the recommendations that she made in relation to the accounts of two clients were suitable for each client, contrary to IIROC Dealer Member Rule 1300.1(q)

Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Mannings agreed to a fine in the amount of $35,000 and costs in the amount of $5,000.

Click here to read the settlement agreement.

IIROC formally initiated the investigation into Mannings’ conduct in December 2013.  The violations occurred while she was a registered representative with the Nelson branch of CIBC World Markets Inc., an IIROC regulated firm.  Mannings is no longer a registrant with an IIROC-regulated firm.

Originally published on Advisor.ca
See all commentsRecent Comments

KEN.MUZIK.7

The Settlement Agreement between IIROC and Geraldine Mannings is another example of IIROC protecting their Dealer Member and not the Canadian investing public. Consider the following: 1) Mannings has not been registered since July of 2013 and therefore, IIROC is not likely to see a cent of the imposed fine, 2) unsuitable investments that are inconsistent with what was recorded on the NAAFs, NAAFs that had not been updated in years, TFSAs NAAFs that had not been signed by the investors and yet all of the transactions were allowed to be completed by Wood Gundy’s Compliance Department who likely received their share of the compensation paid for all of the transactions. Anyone who reads this settlement agreement on Advisor.ca is knowledgeable enough to know and understand that IIROC did nothing to protect these investors; settlement agreements like this are simply window dressing that demonstrate that self-regulation does not work to protect investors. It would be interesting for one of the editors at Advisor.ca to follow up this story to see whether these investors received any restitution from Wood Gundy for the losses suffered at the hands of one of their employees.

Tuesday, August 4 @ 2:57 pm //////

Add a comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Register on Advisor.ca