Enforcement Actions
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
CASES OF NOTE
2010
NOTE: Stipulations of Fact and Consent to Penalty (SFC); Offers of Settlement (OS); and Letters of Acceptance Waiver, and Consent (AWC) are entered into by Respondents without admitting or denying the allegations, but consent is given to the described sanctions & to the entry of findings. Additionally, for AWCs, if FINRA has reason to believe a violation has occurred and the member or associated person does not dispute the violation, FINRA may prepare and request that the member or associated person execute a letter accepting a finding of violation, consenting to the imposition of sanctions, and agreeing to waive such member's or associated person's right to a hearing before a hearing panel, and any right of appeal to the National Adjudicatory Council, the SEC, and the courts, or to otherwise challenge the validity of the letter, if the letter is accepted. The letter shall describe the act or practice engaged in or omitted, the rule, regulation, or statutory provision violated, and the sanction or sanctions to be imposed.
August 2010
Charles Wyman Shirey (Principal)
AWC/2008015696301/August 2010
Shirey impersonated customers to expedite the transfer of their accounts from his former broker-dealer to his new broker-dealer. Shirey placed calls to his former broker-dealer, identified himself as the customer and proceeded to impersonate the customers. Although the customers had authorized the transfer of their accounts, they did not authorize the impersonations.
Charles Wyman Shirey (Principal): Fined $7,500; Suspended 30 business days
Tags:  Impersonation     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
February 2010
Jeannette J. Martens
AWC/2008015946101/February 2010
Martens contacted a mutual fund company and misrepresented herself as an assistant to the customerís former registered representative at another member firm in an attempt to obtain confidential information about the customerís account, which the customer had authorized Martens in writing and orally to obtain. At the time of the misrepresentation, Martens had been authorized to act as the customerís broker of record at her firm, but the mutual fund company had not yet processed the change of broker form received from the firm. The mutual fund company would not have provided this information to Martens had she correctly identified herself and her broker-dealer affiliation.
Jeannette J. Martens : Fined $5,000; Suspended 30 business days
Tags:  Impersonation    Mutual Fund     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bill Singer's Comment
Martens was authorized in writing and orally by the client to obtain account information.  Martens was duly authorized to act as the customers broker by her employer firm but the mutual fund company was still processing the change form sent to it by Martens' employer. 

Should Martens have impersonated the assistant -- "no."  Did FINRA need to wallop her with a 30-day suspension on top of a $5,000 fine in light of the above facts?  Solely based upon FINRA's monthly report, I'm not convinced the sit-down was necessary. 
Rogelio A. Villa Jr.
AWC/2009019029201/February 2010
Villa obtained a deceased customerís credit card number during the course of assisting the customerís widow with her banking needs and, without authorization, charged approximately $3,800 to the customerís credit card account. Pretending to be the deceased customer, Villa contacted the credit cardís customer service and requested that the address on the credit card be changed to his home address. Villa added himself as an authorized user on the credit card and requested that a new card be sent to his home address.
Rogelio A. Villa Jr. : Barred
Tags:  Deceased    Impersonation     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bill Singer's Comment
I'm sorry but is this guy a moron or what?  He steals the credit card number from a dead customer, changes the address of record from the deceased's to his own home, and then adds himself as an authorized user -- and, seriously, what is the brilliant gameplan here?  No one is going to eventually discover that some dead customer's card is still in use? 

Not to be too flip, but when Villa impersonated the deceased customer on the telephone, did he simply dial the credit card company's phone number and hold his breath? You know, if you were to ask him why he called and said nothing, would his answer be "Well, I was impersonating a dead guy so I didn't say anything because since the customer was dead I didn't want to give away the fact that I was alive."
Enforcement Actions
Tags
Email Bill Singer Connect with Bill Singer on Facebook Follow Bill Singer on Twitter Link up with Bill Singer on LinkedIn Join Bill Singer on Google+