August 30, 2010
SEC Study period pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act:
Thank you for allowing comments on the above mentioned Act.
I currently hold the following licenses Series 7, 63, 51 and 24 and have been licensed since February 1972. Each year I spend over forty hours in class room, meetings of my Broker Dealer and online FINRA education courses. I am audited by my Broker Dealer annually and unannounced and spot audits are conducted annually. My firm has been audited by the SEC in the last three years and twice previously. We have a full time compliance person on staff that spends her time daily on paperwork and mandated compliance standards.
The suitability standard governing broker-dealers and registered representatives is very robust and heavily enforced now and if the fiduciary standard were to be put in place the added costs would ultimately be absorbed by the consumer.
We also believe that we are acting now in the best interest of our clients and the Act with the look back provisions of the fiduciary standard does not define what rules are for compliance with a legal best interest standard. My concern is what is best, price, ratings, is it historic standards of underwriting, research news or the cheapest product?
Then you add the potential of frivolous and emotional law suits and I question who really wins, the attorneys? Certainly not in the long run the consumer who is represented by an ethical registered representative that acts in the best interest of the consumer and who is regulated by the suitability standards in place currently.
So I would ask that you not consider the fiduciary standard but keep in place the suitability standard.
Thank you for letting us comment on the pending issue.
Larry Lambert CLU, CFP