The Ontario Securities Commission has rejected a request that it should – and not IIROC – issue a new penalty for an advisor appealing an earlier decision.
The OSC has passed on a request it – and not IIROC, itself – re-issue a penalty for an advisor admitting to a supervisory breach.
“Although it would be expedient and far less costly for the parties, I am not prepared to substitute the Commission’s judgment with respect to sanctions for that of the Panel,” writes Christopher Portner, commissioner for OSC in explaining his decision to reject the first of two options requested by Bryan Andrew Vickers in appealing the IIROC hearing panel penalty handed down to him in December.
The commissioner’s comments follow an initial hearing held on Dec. 16 where Vickers conceded that when he was a branch manager, he failed to properly supervise another employee, Derek Axford, in connection with the sale of inverse exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Vickers was a branch manager with RBC Dominion Securities in London, Ont., and is now a registered rep with the same branch.
Vickers argued that an error was made by the IIROC panel and suggested that its penalty decision-making was not limited to the Agreed Statements of Facts.
His request for a re-evaluation of his case was granted but in a decision dated April 24, Commissioner Portner redirects Vickers request to have the OSC decide on penalty. He instead cedes to Vickers’s request that the new penalty decision be taken up by a newly constituted IIROC hearing panel. IIROC had petitioned for the same outcome.
The move effectively cancels the decision of an earlier IIROC hearing panel, which had originally ordered that Vickers be suspended for six months, fined $30,000, and that he re-write the supervisor’s course before being re-approved as a branch manager.
Vickers admitted that from April 2010 to August 2011 for failing to adequately supervise a registered rep, and some of his client’s accounts when Axford recommended inverse exchange-traded funds to clients, contrary to IIROC rules.
In his appeal to OSC, Vickers had sought to have the penalty reduced to no suspension and a $15,000 fine; according to the OSC review, he didn’t oppose the course requirement.
“Although it would be expedient and far less costly for the parties, I am not prepared to substitute the Commission’s judgment with respect to sanctions for that of the Panel,” writes Christopher Portner, commissioner for OSC in explaining his decision to reject the first of two options requested by Bryan Andrew Vickers in appealing the IIROC hearing panel penalty handed down to him in December.
The commissioner’s comments follow an initial hearing held on Dec. 16 where Vickers conceded that when he was a branch manager, he failed to properly supervise another employee, Derek Axford, in connection with the sale of inverse exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Vickers was a branch manager with RBC Dominion Securities in London, Ont., and is now a registered rep with the same branch.
Vickers argued that an error was made by the IIROC panel and suggested that its penalty decision-making was not limited to the Agreed Statements of Facts.
His request for a re-evaluation of his case was granted but in a decision dated April 24, Commissioner Portner redirects Vickers request to have the OSC decide on penalty. He instead cedes to Vickers’s request that the new penalty decision be taken up by a newly constituted IIROC hearing panel. IIROC had petitioned for the same outcome.
The move effectively cancels the decision of an earlier IIROC hearing panel, which had originally ordered that Vickers be suspended for six months, fined $30,000, and that he re-write the supervisor’s course before being re-approved as a branch manager.
Vickers admitted that from April 2010 to August 2011 for failing to adequately supervise a registered rep, and some of his client’s accounts when Axford recommended inverse exchange-traded funds to clients, contrary to IIROC rules.
In his appeal to OSC, Vickers had sought to have the penalty reduced to no suspension and a $15,000 fine; according to the OSC review, he didn’t oppose the course requirement.
