Wednesday, April 20, 2011

SEC Needs Comments from Investors

Looking to have some input into securities regulations? The SEC is seeking comments on the effectiveness of existing investor education efforts as part of a review mandated by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

While it is unknown how much attention the SEC pays to public comments, we do know that the comments are reviewed and often included by the Commission in its reports. When the Commission asks for comments on rule proposals, some of those comments do result in a modification to a proposed rule, so it might we worthwhile to express your opinions and concerns.

Section 917 of the Dodd-Frank Act directs the SEC to conduct a study of retail investors’ financial literacy and submit its findings to Congress by July 21, 2012. Among other things, Section 917 states that the study must identify “the most effective existing private and public efforts to educate investors.”

The Commission is seeking public comment to better understand the details and effectiveness of current programs, and help ensure that the study includes all relevant programs. “We want to know more about what’s out there and what’s working in the world of investor education,” said Lori J. Schock, Director of the SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy.

The public comment period will remain open for 60 days following publication of the request in the Federal Register.

As part of its investor education effort, the SEC recently upgraded its Investor.gov website devoted exclusively to investor education. The site has been redesigned and expanded with more information about a variety of topics including how to research investments and investment professionals, understand fees, and prepare for life events. The updated Investor.gov also includes materials targeted to such specific groups as members of the military, teachers, and retirees. Videos, interactive quizzes, and additional investor education resources are expected to be added to the website in coming months. More...

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Actor Larry Hagman Settles with Citigroup

When Actor Larry Hagman (Dallas and I Dream of Jeanie) sued Citigroup for mismanagement of his investments, and won, the case made headlines. Of course there was the story that JR Ewing sued his financial advisor, but then there was the amount of the award - $1.1 million in damages, and $10 million in punitive damages.

But the award has been used in the press to argue that arbitration is bad - you see, Citigroup appealed! Imagine that, a punitive damage award that is 10 times the compensatory damages and they had the nerve to appeal!

Some commentators seem to forget that customers, and firms, have a RIGHT to appeal an arbitration award. It is a right that is rarely excerised, and is rarely successful, but it is a right. And given such a significant punitive damage award, that would be tossed by most judges if a jury imposed such an amount, it was not a surprise to see Citigroup appeal the award. Add to that the fact that the arbitrators tacked on an additional $400,000 in attorneys fees, and an appeal was almost a guarantee.

What was even more newsworthy, but completely overlooked by those same commentators, was the fact that Citigroup WON the appeal. The arbitration award was thrown out. I have not been able to locate the decision, but Bloomberg reported that the award was vacated because one of the arbitrators failed to disclose that he had been involved in a similar lawsuit in 2007.  Sounds like Citigroup was well within its rights to appeal the decision.

But we will never know the outcome. The NYT is reporting that Hagman and Citigroup settled their dispute - Shades of J.R. Ewing: Citigroup and Larry Hagman Reach Accord - NYTimes.com

Related articles, courtesy of Zemanta: