Finra seeks to tighten arbitrator rule

Regulator's proposal would exclude mutual fund, hedge fund people from pool of public panelists

Jan 14, 2013 @ 3:39 pm

By Dan Jamieson

Finra is proposing to tighten up on its definition of “public” arbitrator.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. wants to exclude people associated with a mutual fund or hedge fund from its pool of public arbitrators and require certain others to wait for two years after ending an industry affiliation before being classified as a public arbitrator.

In a filing posted Friday on the Securities and Exchange Commission's website, Finra said the change “would improve investors' perception about the fairness and neutrality of Finra's public arbitrator roster.”

Under its proposal, Finra would implement a two-year cooling-off period for attorneys, accountants and others who have done a certain amount of work for securities industry clients, and for those who work for or serve as officers or directors of entities controlled by securities firms. The two-year wait also would cover spouses and immediate family members of such individuals.

“In one instance, an individual applying to be a public arbitrator had retired one month earlier from a lengthy career at a law firm that represented securities industry clients,” Finra said in its filing.

Finra already has a five-year waiting period for former securities industry employees wishing to serve as public arbitrators, and bans those associated with the industry for at least 20 years from ever becoming public arbitrators.

The latest proposal is another step in a long-running effort by Finra to tighten up on who is considered a public panelist.

Still, claimants' attorneys say Finra needs to go further and eliminate anyone who has had any connection with the industry.

Finra's proposal is “a step in right direction, but … there's a lot more ground to cover,” said Scott Ilgenfritz, a partner with Johnson Pope Bokor Ruppel & Burns LLP and president of the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association, which represents plaintiff's attorneys.

The two-year cooling-off period is a “noble” idea, said Hugh Berkson, a plaintiff's attorney and partner at Hermann Cahn & Schneider LLP.

He noted, however, that an industry defense attorney can be classified as a public panelist after a two-year wait.

“I just don't think you walk away from the defense-lawyer mindset in two years,” he said.


What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Featured video


The #MeToo movement and the financial advice industry

Attendees at the Women to Watch luncheon commend the #MeToo movement for raising awareness about the issue of sexual harassment and bringing women together.

Latest news & opinion

What the next market downturn means for small RIAs

Firms that have enjoyed AUM growth because of the runup in stocks may find it hard to adjust to declining revenues if the market suffers a major correction.

DOL fiduciary rule likely to live on despite appeals court loss

Future developments will hinge on whether the Labor Department continues the fight to remake the regulation its own way.

DOL fiduciary rule: Industry reacts to Fifth Circuit ruling

Groups on both sides of the fiduciary debate had plenty to say.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacates DOL fiduciary rule

In split decision, judges say agency exceeded authority.

UBS, after dumping the broker protocol, continues to see brokers come and go

The wirehouse has seen 14 individuals or teams leave and five join for a net loss of $2.4 billion in AUM


Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print