FINRA Guesses It Will Take A Look At The Information It Collects On Brokers, If You Insist

Now that, you know, certain information has come to light, and given the nature of all this new shit? It has occurred to FINRA that perhaps running fingerprints and politely requesting that member firms poke around a bit deeper into their potential hires’ disciplinary history will not suffice to keep The Wall Street Journal from running extremely embarrassing exposes about its impotence.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a Wall Street watchdog, is set to propose rule changes on Wednesday that would require brokerage firms for the first time to do formal background checks on new employees, including brokers hired from other firms, according to a person familiar with the proposals.

Finra also intends to vet the information publicly reported for each of the approximately 630,000 stockbrokers it oversees against public court records, officials said….

Richard Ketchum, Finra’s chairman and chief executive, said the regulator was acting in response to the “unacceptable” situation exposed by the Journal. “Finra is deeply concerned by the reporting failures, which are inconsistent with the regulatory responsibility of both firms and their registered persons,” Mr. Ketchum said in a statement.

Stockbroker Records to Receive More Scrutiny [WSJ]

(hidden for your protection)
Show all comments

4 Responses to “FINRA Guesses It Will Take A Look At The Information It Collects On Brokers, If You Insist”

  1. Ajai says:

    I've got a strategy to beat them at the name cross-check

  2. Guest says:

    Great. No need for a compliance dept then.

  3. Tears4Merica says:

    Someone failed the 63 eleven times…. I don't remember much about the test, but I assume selecting answers at random would've yielded a better result

    "Michael B. Ralby, 54, who works for Morgan Stanley in Boca Raton, Fla., failed his Series 63 exam 11 times before passing it in 1993. He has five red flags on his record."