Subject: File No. SR-FINRA-2015-003
From: Leonard Steiner
Affiliation: Steiner & Libo

April 6, 2015

Another bad rule designed to make FINRA arbitration less consumer friendly and more pro industry, i.e., FINRA’s members.  FINRA should be doing everything possible to encourage settlements, not to discourage them.  If the parties want to continue an arbitration hearing either to pursue settlement or because a settlement already has been reached but has not as yet been finalized, why would FINRA impose costs to do so?  If FINRA wants to pay arbitrators for hearings that have been cancelled, let it do so out of its own pocket, and not out of the pocket of consumers who already have been financially devastated by the industry, i.e., FINRA’s members, and who are forced to pursue arbitration in FINRA in order to recoup some of the money they have lost.

Leonard Steiner
433 N. Camden Drive, Suite 730
Beverly Hills, CA  90210