Securities Commissions assist predatory behaviours

[admin]

March 16th, 2016

To: Financial Consumer Agency of Canada
427 Laurier Avenue West, 6th Floor
Ottawa ON K1R 1B9

Fax: 1-866-814-2224 / 613-941-1436

I write to request investigation into breaches of ‘legislation, regulations, voluntary codes of conduct, and/or public safety commitments’, within the mandate described in FCAC’s annual report.

Specific to: Ontario Securities Act Section 44,
Alberta Securities Act Section 100,
BC Securities Act Section 34,
Manitoba Securities Act Sections 74 and 74.1

As well as any other rules, laws, or public safety commitments that pertain to misrepresentation, deception, or falsification by our regulatory bodies, as well as the banking and investment industry.

It is found that Provincial Securities Commissions, or key persons within commissions, are selectively ignoring violations of public protective commitments and laws found in Securities Legislation.

In one example, ignoring the most basic laws against “misrepresentation”, has seemed to cause a ‘cascade effect’ of negating the “Fair, Honest and Good Faith” requirements, for banks and investment firms. This ‘slippery slope’ has allowed Canadian’s financial security to thus be violated in a myriad of ways by our most trusted institutions. Captured regulation appears to describe this issue, which allows ‘two wrongs to add up to making billions’…predominantly for banks and investment dealers.

I call your attention to a recent report by the Small Investor Protection Association, titled ‘ADVISOR TITLE TRICKERY’. This describes the deception practiced by thousands of bank and investment system players. http://sipa.ca/library

It appears that Securities Commissions utilize ‘personal discretion’, to decide if and when to enforce laws or to ignore laws and principles entirely. This occurs even when commissions are notified in writing of the harms of ignoring the law. I am compelled to ask the Financial Consumer Agency to investigate Securities regulatory and self-regulatory bodies and to intervene to protect Canadians.

I look forward to co-operating with FCAC, with others, and hopefully with a public inquiry, to ensure that Canadian laws are applied to the protection of Canadians, and no longer ignored for the sole benefit of the financial sector.

Larry Elford, Investment Forensics
Former CFP, CIM, FCSI, APM

[admin]

securities regulator compensation study December 2016 early draft (research project in progress):


Ontario Securities Commission The 2016 plan for Salaries and benefits totals $80.7 million.

http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Publications/Publications_rpt_2015_osc-md-and-a_en.pdf

In 2016 of the many people who work at the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC), three hundred and ten (310) of them made over $100,000 per year. There are fifty seven (57) people at the Ontario Securities Commission who earn more than their Provincial Premier!

We also note, the total amount of those earning over $100,000 in our entire Legislative Assembly in Ontario is $19,562,584.40, compared to the Ontario Securities Commission amount of $52,470,323.50

In 2016 of the many people who work at the OSC there are 310 who make over $100,000 per year.

Varying from $707,484.28 to $101,567.50

Source:http://www.sunshinelist.ca/ search Ontario Securities Commission

Ontario's Premier, Kathleen Wynne makes $209,374.80 yet there are 57 people at the Ontario Securities Commission make more money than the Provincial Premier!

Source:http://www.sunshinelist.ca search Kathleen Wynne

**Of interest the total amount of those earning over $100,000 in our Legislative Assembly in Ontario $19,562,584.40 compared to the Ontario Securities Commission.$52,470,323.50

http://www.sunshinelist.ca/

It remains to be seen what the FCAC can actually enforce since banking seems to be a virtual vacuum of conduct rules.

Apparently they can't do much. In 2015 and 2016 $0 fines imposed.

In Oct 2016 glowing report of the banks. Even if now they wake up and do something their maximum fine is $500,000 and if they find them to be serious allegations they can name them. $500,000 is a pittance to these banks whose profits are in the billions and naming and shaming well we all know how well that works.

Re: The root cause of the issue is TD management who have created the ugly culture at the branches

All the banks have this culture not just TD

Re: I like Peter's approach where he tries to show the flow of staff between regulators and industry - the industry- regulator complex.The real money is made after their stint at the regulator.

I think this revolving door is definitely worthy of further research.

Re: I agree with Larry , regulatory failure from weak rules, procrastination , lack of investor engagement to lax enforcement and wrist slap penalties are the major cause for the situation we find ourselves in today.

Agree partly but certainly not with "lack of investor engagement to lax enforcement"
investors have no voice on their own. Any attempts by regulators to engage investors is woefully inadequate. If they wanted investor engagement they should contact every soul who has ever tried to put in a complaint and they would get an ear full!
From my experience and perspective they don't want to hear from or engage investors, they occasionally just want to make it 'look' like they do.
D






Millions For Securities Regulators means 'Billions’ For Financial Industry,

BCSC’s top four executives shared in compensation of approximately $1.8 million per year for 2016 and 2015.

http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/uploadedFiles/Abo ... 3072036147 page 30 BCSC Annual Report

BC Securities Commission, annual report page 30
click on image to enlarge or to zoom in


This might help explain this story of 100,000 falsified “advisors” being allowed to deceive investors, while regulators ignore the Securities Act misrepresentations.

http://lethbridgeherald.com/news/lethbr%20...%20ses-alarm/

Or the upcoming report about thousands of “exemptions” to Canadian laws, with regulators handing out free “do not go to jail” cards,....for a fee.

Exemptions to Securities Act laws allows dealers to sell ‘factory seconds’ investments to the public. http://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/letters-to-the-editor/2016/11/02/were-all-victims-of-systemic-financial-failures/

Public protections are sold out by Securities Commissions without so much as a whisper of warning, input or public notice.

click on image to enlarge or zoom in


Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) Annual report $2.2 mil to 2.3 mil for top four people, in 2015, and 2016 http://www.albertasecurities.com/Publications/2016-Annual-Report.pdf page 48



http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Publications/Publications_rpt_2016_osc-annual-rpt_en.pdf page 62 Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) Annual report
========

page 48
Click to enlarge image or to zoom in

"The OSC’s key management personnel are the members of the Board of Directors, Chair, Vice-Chairs and Executive Director.
The remuneration of key management personnel includes the following expenses":
Short-term employee benefits Post-employment benefits
Total compensation

Approximately 60 people at the OSC earned as much or more than the Premier of Ontario in 2015, at her salary of $208,974.00

Another 250 people at the OSC make it onto the Public sector salary disclosure 2015, (sunshine list) for Ontario for a total of 310 OSC employees earning $100,000 or more. (100% of this pay is provided by the industry participants that the OSC is set up to police)

https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-sector-salary-disclosure-2015-all-sectors-and-seconded-employees

Executive Compensation at the Alberta Securities Commission 2016

click to enlarge image

Five securities regulators in Alberta share $2.7 million in earnings 2016 annual report @cbcgopublic http://www.albertasecurities.com/Public ... Report.pdf

[admin]

October 28th, 2016

Further to CIBC and TD reprimands by the OSC, I seek to notify the regulator of similar, as yet, undisclosed violations of customers by RBC


Dear OSC

I found that RBC systemically encouraged incentivized and pushed its sales force into selling DSC (Deferred Sales Charge funds) when alternate classes of otherwise identical funds of cheaper costs and better advantage to the client, were available.

I have record of fully 71% of RBC top fund holdings report being held in DSC funds. That was a late 1990’s report showing total funds of $2 billion dollars, and the 5% sales commission DSC on those DSC funds would have profited RBC and RBC sales agents by $100 million dollars roughly, while being of some disadvantage to the investors.

I noticed TD and CIBC making settlement lately with the OSC and I feel that RBC may in fact be a larger offender in demonstrating a systemic practice of NOT putting the interests of the client first and foremost.

I also know that this practice was well concealed by RBC, and that salespersons who did not fully comply with the offensive practice, or with the concealment of same were singled out for retribution. More than one employee can speak to the types of retalations handed out by RBC for “offenders” who dared speak their voice over such ethical matters.

In addition to DSC funds, I found (and disclosed) a case where an RBC agent double dipped a client account for extra fees, by selling the client a DSC fund and then subsequently putting that same client into an “advisor” (fee based) account, causing the client to pay additional fees on top of the generous sales commissions already paid.

Finally, although not evidence of unethical behaviour on its own, this RBC management presentation from 2001 speaks “betwen the lines" (footnotes page 15 for example) of the overall RBC strategy to get as many RBC clients into fe based investments, which can cause RBC to earn dollars, “on every dollar in every client account, every day of the year” or words to that effect http://www.investisseurautonome.info/PD ... gement.pdf

Highest cost funds sales, double dipping, fee based accounts.....all of which are designed to enrich the dealer, and handicap the client.

Finally, a search of sales agents at RBC 2016 shows them as having thousands of persons registered as “Dealing Representatives”, whilst misleading clients, and violating the “representation” rules found in the Ontario Securities Act (sec 44?) to allow a systemic deception (intentional) which has the effect of causing RBC customers to be of a false impression of the type of relationship that they are in, the type of license or registration that their “dealer” is offering them, and the duty of care or agency duty of protection that the customer is led to expect.

It seems to be a very intentional manner of deception, added to a company-wide policy of taking advantage of the deception thusly: By posing its commission sales agents, as trusted “advisors”, while not holding an “Advisor” or “adviser” registration, the customer is led down the garden path, so to speak, an into a complex web of high cost investment products.

These products have the effect of being able to cost up to 2% more to investors, cutting clients portfolio’s by half or more over a 35 year period, whist putting the other half in to the pockets of RBC.

I enclose what I feel to be the ROOT CAUSE of some of the deception, which I hope the OSC will address as part of this complaint, a reprt titled “Advisor Title Trickery found at this link http://sipa.ca/library/SIPAsubmissions/ ... 202016.pdf

Please treat investment dealers who abuse clients, mislead clients, and harvest clients financially, to the full effects of our laws and standards, so that confidence in Canada’s regualtory system can perhaps be restored.

I thank you for reading this complaint, and I will gladly co-operate with the OSC on matters which deal properly on these client abusive practices

Larry Elford

Alberta

lelford@shaw.ca

[admin]

Imagine Securities Regulators in a third world country who concealed a “vowel movement” from millions of unsuspecting investors.

Here are Canada’s regulators NOT telling Canadians that there are only 4000 registered "advisers" in all of Canada, BUT there are over 100,000 commission salespersons who are faking an “advisor” title to dupe and deceive investors....

Securities Commissions in Canada are thus participating in a game of BUYER BEWARE for all Canadian investors, whilst themselves getting paid millions of dollars from investment industry players...to play their game.

(The hidden vowel movement is "baiting" investors by talking about “registered "advisers", and then delivering something entirely different to the investor, a non-registered “Advisor”. (this occurs about 95 times out of every 100 investor experiences in Canada)
(some would call this “bait and switch” some may call it fraud)

Two videos below, where you can see if you can spot the vowel movement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJKpGnc ... UeWFBnJt_U Know what to Expect from your Registered Investment Adviser

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo8k45fZ75oKnow The Cost Of Your Registered Investment Adviser

And this article with video guide, shows exactly how the vowel movement works, who to check it yourself, to protect yourself from the “Advisor Bait and Switch"

http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/103 ... gets-condo

[admin]

Said this week by the smartest man in Canada on the topic of systemic investor abuse by investment industry professionals:

The current regulators are allowing the industry to deceive the Canadian public.

I agree with this and it was also agreed to by two or more other investment industry professionals who are well into the know. DEEP into the know, if you want to know......

He went on to say this:

The regulators create the perception that they discipline the industry to protect investors yet Debra's Report clearly shows that the majority of finse are never collected ,,,

almost one billion dollars worth!

[url]
http://sipa.ca/library/SIPAsubmissions/ ... 202016.pdf[/url]

Here is the IIROC (industry self regulator report on unpaid fines, just one segment)

http://www.iiroc.ca/investors/Pages/Unpaid-Fines-Report.aspx

========

One billion of uncollected fines.....

Over 5000 laws exempted.....to benefit investment sellers and manufacturers......no notice of exempted products to consumers....

160,000 registered salespersons allowed to violate provincial laws (Alberta Sec Act sec 75, 100, Ontario Sec Act sec 44, BC Sec Act sec 34 etc) and deceive the public into a false sense of trust and vulnerability with false, non registered titles...

(should dealing with a financial "advisor" in Canada be as risky as trusting a salesperson at FutureShop? Where the electronics giant "hid" that all its staff were on commission???

Sheesh! I thought our banks were just a tad better than Future Shop....)

========

Here, for the record are the candid comments, (and the well informed SOLUTION) as written by the man:

The more I think about it, the more I inevitably come to the same conclusion.

The current regulators are allowing the industry ro deceive the Canadian public.

The CSA (Canadian Securities Administrators) acknowledge that "Financial Advisor" is an unregulated busiess title but allows the industry to call commission driven sales persons by this tilt that

misleads people into believing it is the same as Adviser and that their Advisor has a fiduciary duty and will look after their best interests.

The regulators allow marketing that reinforces this misconception.

The regulators create the perception that they discipline the industry to protect investors yet Debra's Report clearly shows that

the majority of finse are never collected

,,, almost one billion dollars woirth!

Further the disciplinary

investigations are a joke. The investigators are on the side pf the perpetrator.

They often proclaim there is not sufficient evidence of rule breaching or simply provide a warning letter to the perpetrator and do nothing to help the victim gain restitution.

I know for sure this is true because it happened to me. Absolutley no help from the regulators ... including the OSC.

For example many years ago the OSC had investigated my broker for insider trading and called me in for interrogation. Two hours alone with two interrogators treating me as a suspect. The interrogation was recorded. When I found out much later that my broker had cheated me I went to the OSC and requested a copy of the interrogation because it would have provided good evidence to support my case. My first contact said it would take some time because it was in their archives. When I followed up I was told they could not find it. There are other specific examples as well that seemed a conspiracy with the industry. And these are the regulators that protect investors?

I agree that to aloow this bunch of rogues to create a national regulator would be of little or no benefit to investors. It would in all probability perpetuate the deception that exists today.

The Government must create a new Investor Protection Agency or a national auditor with legislation that provides the power for oversight to ensure that the welfare of Canadian investors is protected.

The current sham of regulation does nothing to protect investiors. For example; the OSC saw fit to gain exemption from the reduced limitation period for themselves but did nothing for investors. Their heads would have to be buried in the sand if they did not realize that victims of major financial loss need more than two years to get their heads around the fact that a "well regulated" industry and trusted "Financial Advisor" and maybe "Vice President" would cheat them out of their money and then follow the industry procedure for addressing complaints within two years.

I know I could not do it even within the six year limit that existed at the time of my loss. When I found out there was indeed something wrong it took me six months full time just to investigate and find out what actually had happened ... and the regulators were most definitely unhelpful. It was a friendly journalist ... Dan Westell of the Financial Post ... who helped me find the way.

I think trying to deal with the current batch of regulators is indeed a waste of time. I feel we may add to the deception by doing so.

Experts who can only make recommendations would also seem to be a waste of time, no matter how well intended. Input without results may also aid the deception. Consider the Wise Persons Committee. At the time it seemed promosing indeed, but nothing happened.

More studies. More comments. More deception.

The little good we can do is trying to raise awareness and helping the odd soul on their path to recovery. Many never make it. Some suffer in silence. others end it.

Ai least there is some solace when a small investor fighting for restitution seems to be raching the final stages but then cease contact. I say to myself "another out-of-court settlement".

At least that is my cynical view on this glorious Victoria day week-end.

[admin]

Author's Note:

I work giving Canadians fair warning that their investment "advisor" is often no such thing, but rather a salesperson, representing the interests of the dealer. The remarkable thing is that this information is actually noted on each "advisor's" license. However it (the legal license) is cleverly concealed by just over 99% of so called "advisors." I began an online journey to bring this info to Ottawa.

The video shows in 1.5 minutes how this deception is hidden from Canadians by broker-dealers and government regulators, when it might be the most important peice of information with regard to whom you asking to help you with your money.

- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

===================

Please click on the Youtube link below to view a 1 min 30 second video on how to search for the legal license or registration of your "advisor", and some additional hints to show you what the provincial securities commissions bury or make difficult to find. The difficult to find is ironically the most important information. (You would think the regulators would make the most important info the easiest, rather than most difficult....)
https://youtu.be/zIjt0qRsJKg


Update May 20th, 2016 White Rock BC.

A License check of 19 so-called “advisors” in a WHITE ROCK BC investment office, found ZERO licensed as claimed, 100% were concealing salesperson license. This does not speak well of the investment selling industry nor the BC Securities Regulator and industry self regulators. Total license's searched for this project is now up to 274, without finding ONE single industry registrant who is holding a license for the title they claim to hold. Zero found, without tilting the study in any way. What does this say about your retirement future? It says that "somebody is richer than you think"......but who?

- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

(a list of other Canadian Communities will be shown at the end of this post, outlining where a search for registered "advisors" in Canada have turned up zero results, despite ONLY searching for those persons in Canada who work for a "trusted" institution, ONLY those who are regulated by the provincial government and ONLY searching those who claim and advertise themselves as "advisors"......)
=======

THE JOURNEY BEGINS...

It is April, 2016 and the Liberal Party Policy convention in Winnipeg occurs in May. I will start in an easterly direction from my home in Alberta, and journey through as many communities along the TransCanada Highway as I can cover.

For each community I intend to search the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) site, checking the license and/or registration category of those who proclaim "advisor" staus under Canadian law.

http://aretheyregistered.ca is the link to visit and if one watches the 1.5 minute video shown above, readers will stand a much better chance of seeing what regulators appear to wish to keep hidden from the public. The CSA web site has added a couple of clicks/tricks to keep people from easily seeing the most important information. The video makes it easier.

The Federal Liberal Party enters into this story, and gets credit, after a number of the local members became interested in this topic, and wanted to find out how Canadians get financially abused by trusted financial professionals.

I give them credit for this reason, they have created a great policy document (draft form) that looks to protect investors. Other parties have so far only preached the corporate status quo, which is in the opposite interests of the consumer. (full disclosure; I am not a current or former member of the Liberal Party, but I do applaud the forsight of their members for seeing this issue of Canadians being un-protected, and their desire to act)

After learning how most financial sellers are merely "posing" as financial professionals, and violating rules, laws and principles in order to do so, they drafted up simply the best draft investor protection policy I have seen in over a decade. It (the policy will be attched to this published post.

Now for the journey:

First stop, my home town of Lethbridge Alberta, where I looked up the license/registration category for approximately 60 financial firm employees who advertise that they are "advisors".

Of the 60 searched, not one single person held that category of license/registration, as required by law. Each was "using" something known in the business as "title inflation", in order to avoid having to tell clients the truth....which is that they are registered in the salesperson category, officially titled "Dealing Representative". (Salesperson)

In the industry a "dealing representative", "represents" the interests of the dealer, while an "Advising Representative" is required by law to represent solely the interests of the investor and NONE OTHER. Dealing Representative is considered to be a "salesperson", and in fact the legal name of this category was indeed "salesperson" until it was changed (by the CSA) in September of 2009.

It is a bit of a ruse, but as you can see from the Lethbridge area license/registry searches, it encompasses about 100% of the sales practices of the retail investment selling side of the business. The other side is the investment "advising" side of the business, which is a totally different game.

Next stop along Highway 3, heading east is Medicine Hat. Here I searched 39 persons using either an “advisor” or “consultant” title. 100% were licensed in the category of a dealing representative (Salesperson) and not the category of advising representative.

A true cynic would call this fraudulent concealment, but I leave it to the reader to judge for themselves. (there are at least 11 other rules, laws, criminal codes and ethical requirements violated)

I will update this post when I can, letting Canadians know how many truly registered "adviser's" (or "advisors, depending upon your spelling choice) I find as I jouney east. So far the search number is 99 and the number of truly licened "advisors" or "advisers" discovered is ZERO so far.

Having worked 20 years inside this industry I know how the lie works, and I also know how how self-regulation (and "purchased" regulation (ASC, OSC etc)) works to deceive the public of the most essential element of a financial relationship.

The result of these deceptions is that the investment industry earns billions more by overcharging trusting and vulnerable investors, having duped them into a false sense of trust by concelament of their true license and loyalty.

Fast forward 35 years, and millions of Canadians, will be retiring with half as much in their retirement accounts, while the false "advisors" and their banker/dealers will own the other half. All it takes to do this harm is to charge an extra, nearly invisible 2%.

The lie, when combined with the "covering effects" of self/purchased regulation makes getting this 2% as easy as taking candy from a child. Please read along and share this with others.

Aguably, up to eleven (11) of the rules or laws within this link can be found to be flaunted daily, in an effort to mislead investors

in Canada, not counting the industry's own rules, codes and principles violated. [url] http://www.crimes-of-persuasion.com/law ... l_laws.htm
[/url]
- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

========

Update Saturday April 23, 2016. Swift Current SK. Searched 13 local investment Advisors, and found none with anything other than a Dealing Representative (Salesperson) license or registration. Zero who have the "Advising Representative" registration, which usually also carries the duty to not act as a counterparty to the client interests.

In other news, banks in Swift Current are seeking to hire investment "advisors", but in the employment description they refer to them this way:

City: Swift Current

Address: Swift Current

Work Hours/Week: 37.5

Work Environment: Branch

Employment Type: Permanent

Career Level: Experienced Hire/Professional

Pay Type: Commissioned Sales

"Experience in a direct marketing role"

"4-6 years of outbound sales experience"

"As an Investment Advisor, you work within a 100% commission compensation structure"

(I guess they just "protect" their trusting customers from learning about the "commission sales" bit....:)

- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

======
SOLUTION proposed by a group of public minded Liberal Party members (I am not a member of any political party in an attempt to remain outside of the fray of politics. The fray of financial fraud is already deep enough with cronyism and improper loyalties thank you:)

Related article: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193&sid=...
Letter Response
DRAFT Resolution on National Investor Protection

WHEREAS

Most Securities regulators in Canada are “self”-regulatory and can use this (the "self" part) to bypass investigation and prosecution of industry wrongs.

WHEREAS

The financial industry pays the salaries of the regulatory force, rather than the taxpayer. This means that clever financiers get to choose who to hire to regulate financiers. i.e. hiring your own police

WHEREAS

The financial industry pays regulators three to four times more than what they would earn in similar employ elsewhere; over-paying makes regulators “compliant” and more willing to say “YES” to the financial industry; In consequence, failing to protect the public.

WHEREAS

All thirteen (13) securities commissions, acting in concert will allow any financial institution in the country to be exempt from our Securities laws, simply by completing an application with no public debate and no public notice.

WHEREAS

Securities Regulators and Self-regulators in Canada have representation on the RCMP Investigation Units which further allows the investment industry to avoid criminal prosecutions.

BE IT RESOLVED

That the Government of Canada adopt policy supporting and implementing major changes to the Securities regulatory system in Canada.

Establish a National Investor Protection Agency with the following attributes:

Separating all investment police functions and investigations from the securities commission and the securities industry. A separate, specialized, Securities Crime Police Unit would be formed.
2. The government appointing Protective Regulators representative of the public interest and paid by the taxpayer, not industry.

3. Allowing no exemptions to the law, except in extreme cases where full public discourse and disclosure can show no damage to the investing public by such exemption.

4. Separating the Securities commissions and industry paid regulators from the RCMP Investigation Units and any police agency.

5. Applying and enforcing the Criminal Code for the Financial Industry, rather than allowing “self” regulators to ignore criminal code violations of the investment industry.

- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

======

Update May 6th, 2016

Today a Winnipeg search of 26 "advisors" at BMO, TD, Assante, on Portage and Main. Found exactly ZERO who hold an advisor or adviser registration as promised. Total now searched of 255 #investment advisors, ZERO with advisor license in #Alberta, #Sask, #Manitoba, #Ontario #Winnipeg

The question might be: what are they doing with your financial interests if they cannot be honest about their license and registration? Talk to your MLA and MP about honest investor protection for Canadians.

Update May 5th, I jumped over to a search of advisors in North Bay, Ontario, population 64,000 people. This was in reaction to a news story about Ontario MPP Vic Fedeli highlighting the economic costs of insurance fraud in the Ontario Legislature this afternoon.

I thought it the appropriate time to shine a light on the fraud that results when commission sales agents conceal their actual license and sales-role, while putting forth a confident (but fraudulent) face of investment "advice". I searched just over one dozen North Bay "advisors" and found none, zero, nil, ...who held an advisor license, or the Securities Act version "adviser". Not a one.

I wonder how many investment products are being sold in North Bay which are more beneficial to the seller, than to the buyer, as a result of this deception? Speak to your MPP if you expect fairness and honesty from your securities dealers and enforcement of existing law, from the securities commission.

Update May 1, Brandon, Manitoba.... seached to find a licensed "advisor or adviser". Found 34 people claiming to fit the role of advisor or investment consultant, and none with either license. None. Each one legally registered as "dealing representative" (salesperson category) with no legal fiduciary duty to client....hmmm

Total searched this trip is 214 people from Alberta, Sask and Manitoba. No legal advisors found.

To be continued.......

Update Ap 28. license check of 16 listed investment advisors at RBC Wealth Management in #Saskatoon, found ZERO holding an advisor license. Total is now ZERO, of 180 "advisors" checked hold advisor license #Lethbridge, #MedicineHat, #Sask411 #SwiftCurrent #MooseJaw #Regina #Saskatoon http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... way-ottawa

- See more at: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/649 ... hYzpx.dpuf

[admin]

13 Provincial Securities Commissions complicit in a heartbreaking failure to protect 30 million Canadians financial well being:

The problem is that almost 100% of persons selling investment product in Canada (perhaps the U.S. as well) are representing themselves to the public as something called an "advisor".

In truth, most of those using the term, "advisor" spelled in this manner are dodging the law, and skirting around the fact that they do not hold this particular license. (imagine if your doctor did not hold a medical license nor adhere to the hippocratic oath...)

Please do not take my word for this, but do your own reading and search your own "advisor" with the link and instructions here: http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/64996/funny-thing-happened-way-ottawa

+++
This link shows a simple way to check the license (not the title) of your financial advisor, and demonstrates that virtually 100% of those searched in 2016, in a few provinces (over 200 searches) were all falsely portraying themselves to the public.

The law says that such misrepresentation is illegal in most provinces. (Eg, Section 34 of the BC Securities Act, Sections 75 and 100 of the Alberta Securities Act, Section 44 of the Ontario Securities Act, etc.) http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/s04.pdf

Securities commissions in 13 provinces and territories are also aware that "advisor" is a non regulated term, while "adviser" is a legal term found in the act. The lead legal counsel for the 13 Securities Commissions, Chris Besko says this about the use of the "advisor" title by salespersons who hold neither an "advisor" license nor an "adviser" license:

Financial Advisor, as you noted, is a common title which many persons use, whether they are registered under securities legislation or not.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193&p=3829&hilit=besko#p3829

Mr. Besko goes on to say this:

We do not prescribe specific titles to be used by those persons who are either dealing or advising in securities. Most securities legislation requires that an individual who holds themselves out as being registered to in fact be registered and to indicate the actual category of registration.

Or looked at from another angle...while the Securities Act seems fairly clear on how financial industry employees must represent themselves, the regulators have found a loophole for themselves.....(which in turn helps the investment dealers with their own loophole...a double loophole?:) whereby they do not "look" at the law if a person is merely abusing a title, and not a license? This makes so little sense, but sadly it seems to be standard practice by 13 Securities Commissions in Canada. Turning a blind eye to the law and to public protection when faced with having to stand up to Canada's financial corporations.

Imagine working in an industry that needs to lie to the customer ......to earn their trust.

(a former investment seller)

Imagine working for a securities commission that needs to "see no evil", in order to not rock the boat...and keep their regulator position.

Search your "advisor" here: http://www.aretheyregistered.ca
And then make contact with your provincial member of the legislature and ask them to find a way to cause the Securities Commission to follow the law.

The financial health of your entire family, perhaps of the nation overall, depends upon fair, honest and good faith financial practices and the regulators are turning a blind eye to simple fraud.

Or, safer yet, get in touch with your federal member of the legislature and ask them to create a national investor protection body which can effectively protect Canadians. This is probably a better bet than in letting 13 Securities Commissions "fix" the problem, when it appears today that they already have "fixed" the system........

[admin]

In a perfect economic storm, costing society billions of dollars, Canadian Securities Commissions drop the ball in three of the most important areas of public protection: (draft solutions that are being proposed to Feds and Provinces found at end of this document)

1.

Failure to enforce the laws of the province, as dictated by the Securities Act.

Nearly 100% of retail investment salespersons are illegally misrepresenting themselves to the public as "advisor", which is a license and registration category that virtually none of them hold. The deception, or concealment of ones true license allows millions of unsuspecting investors to be duped into a false sense of trust and vulnerability, which creates conditions where the salespersons can then sell them higher cost, lesser performing, or third rate investments to maximize profits to the salesperson and the dealer. Billion dollar corporations should not be allowed to skirt laws and to deceive investors. Securities Commissions allow this to occur daily, to millions of Canadians.
3 Media links with sources and examples further to this:
http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/64996/funny-thing-happened-way-ottawa

http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/53360/big-box-lies-investment-salespeople-disguise

http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/50369/canadians-retirement-security-being-abused-financial-institutions



2.

"Exempting" the laws of each province for investment corporations without warning, without notice, without public notice or public interest disclosure.

There are 41 Public articles or posts at this link below, which outline the history and the magnitude of the problem of "discretionary exemptions" to Securities Act laws, and their effects on Canadians. Some have constituted the largest economic harms to Canadians in history, including $35 billion taken in sub-prime investments which were illegal in Canada until commission staff used their "discretion", to allow Canadians to be taken: http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=143


3. When called upon to impose fines in a show of enforcement, the majority of the fines go uncollected, and this information is also withheld from the public and from the government which grants this regulator it's authority. In this April 26th press release from the Small Investor Protection Association of Canada, it is revealed that

uncollected fines against investment dealers and sellers in Canada amount to $899 Million dollars.

http://sipa.ca/library/SIPAsubmissions/500%20SIPA%20REPORT%20Unpaid%20Fines%20A%20National%20Disgrace%20-%20April%202016.pdf

4. If uncollected fines amount to $899 million dollars, and these numbers are not publicly gathered and disclosed to Canadians, the question must be asked, "how much are the total fines levied", and following that question,

"how much were the financial harms to Canadians for the infractions?"

University of Toronto 2007 pension study** suggested that costs to Canadians of $500 million weekly, just from mutual fund products alone, and InvestorAdvocates.ca updated numbers indicate that figure is to closer to $1 Billion per week in harm to Canadians. It is time to rein in the regulators who are not acting to protect Canadians and to enact true, un-conflicted, non-"dual mandated" investor protection.

If the Canadian people, and as a result the Canadian economy, is being harvested of it's wealth by $500 million to $1 billion WEEKLY, it is time that the financial police forces of this nation received a gentle wake up

, perhaps a shake up. ** The $25 Billion Dollar Pension Haircut, University of Toronto, 2007 https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzE_LMPDi9UOYTJiY2NmMDEtM2Y4ZS00OTBjLWE3ZjUtNGYxODAzZjkyOTkw/edit

The following are unofficial drafts of separate proposals, one federal and one provincial, which have been presented to those authorities, with the welcome invitation and the help of the most forward thinking persons in the two levels of government.


proposed Fed policy draft

DRAFT Resolution on Regulation of the Financial Securities Industry   

WHEREAS

Most Securities regulators in Canada are “self”-regulatory (and/or fully industry funded) and often use this to bypass investigation and prosecution of industry wrongs. Criminal matters which should be turned over to police and prosecutors are most often "handled" internally.

[b]WHEREAS

The financial industry pays the salaries of the regulatory force, rather than the taxpayer. This means that clever financiers get to choose who to hire to regulate financiers. i.e. hiring your own police

WHEREAS

The financial industry pays regulators three to four times more than what they would earn in similar employ elsewhere; over-paying makes regulators “compliant” and more willing to say “YES” to the financial industry; In consequence, failing to protect the public.

WHEREAS

All thirteen (13) securities commissions, acting in concert will allow any financial institution in the country to be exempt from our Securities laws, simply by completing an application with no public debate and no public notice.

WHEREAS

Securities Regulators and Self-regulators in Canada have representation on the RCMP Investigation Units which further allows the investment industry to avoid criminal prosecutions.

BE IT RESOLVED

That the Government of Canada adopt policy supporting and implementing major changes to the Securities regulatory system in Canada.

Establish a National Investor Protection Agency with the following attributes:

Separating all investment police functions and investigations from the securities commission and the securities industry. A separate, specialized, Securities Crime Police Unit would be formed.

2. The government appointing Protective Regulators representative of the public interest and paid by the taxpayer, not industry.

3. Allowing no exemptions to the law, except in extreme cases where full public discourse and disclosure can show no damage to the investing public by such exemption.

4. Separating the Securities commissions and industry paid regulators from the RCMP Investigation Units and any police agency.

5. Applying and enforcing the Criminal Code for the Financial Industry, rather than allowing “self” regulators to ignore criminal code violations of the investment industry. [/b]

proposed provincial policy draft

Whereas
Laws in the Alberta Securities Act are not always enforced and no reasons for this are given by the Alberta Securities Commission. One example is that thousands of investment representatives with the “Dealing Representative” (Salesperson) license/registration, are illegally representing themselves to the public as Investment or Financial Advisors. This is misleading, deceptive and potentially harmful to millions of Albertan’s who place a level of trust (not to mention money) in the hands of deceptive and illegally-used “professional” titles. (A recent survey by the Ontario Securities Commission found up to 48 separate titles were used by investment sellers, to conceal their sales role, and to deceive investors)

Be It Resolved #1
That the Alberta Securities Commission be compelled by legislation to not exercise “discretion” on which laws can be ignored and which laws enforced. The “dual mandate” of both investor protection and industry protection has shown to be deceptive, misleading or potentially dangerous to Alberta investor protection. For one specific example see Section 100 of the Act which are the provisions on “Representation or holding out of registration”.

Whereas
Thousands of exemptions to laws of the Alberta Securities Act have been granted, most without public notice, or public consultation. In addition, enquiries into what process, or public interest benefit might result from these exemptions (or harms) are rebuffed and dismissed by the commission. Exemptions are done at the “discretion” of Commission members and yet there is no requirement for these same commission members to be open with the Alberta public, about whose interest is served, or harmed, by granting exemption to our laws. Most of these exemptions are to the benefit of financial corporations. Few if any, can be found to benefit the public. Many are very harmful to the public interest and have resulted in harms to the public of billions upon billions of dollars. $35 billion dollars is the Canada-wide loss of just ONE exempt market product.

Be It Resolved #2
That the Alberta Securities Commission be compelled by legislation to bring full disclosure, full accountability and open transparency to the public, for any future applications for exemptions to the laws contained within the Alberta Securities Act.

Whereas
A recent research study by The Small Investor Protection Association of Canada (http://www.sipa.ca) released April 25th of this year reveals, with government sources, that of all the investment regulatory agencies and commissions in Canada, they combined have 899 Million dollars of UN-Collected fines. This number suggests that the amount of harms to Canadians is higher than the fines levied, and I believe it would be in the interests of the public that the harm to Alberta residents, from actions of market participants and professionals, be carefully and professionally studied, and the results of those studies be released at least semi-annually to Albertans.

Be It Resolved #3
That the Alberta Securities Commission advertise openly for independent, (non-financial-industry connected/related) studies to estimate the economic, systemic dollar-value harms to Albertan’s from systemic financial abuse of the public. It is essential to the integrity of the financial industry and to the economic health of Albertans, that our governance systems can be not only trusted to deal honestly with Albertans, but to be seen and shown as trustworthy.

Whereas
The Alberta Securities Commission is burdened with a “dual mandate” to serve both industry AND investors. These interests are often found to be at odds with each other, and whereas the salaries of the ASC are 100% funded by fees and levies from industry, a conflict of interest is found in this serving of two masters, while being paid by only one. These conflicts have led to billions of dollars of systemic abuses against Albertan’s, to go un-investigated and un-prosecuted as shown in #1 and #2 above, in addition to many others not shown herein. (Currently, most important issues of investor abuse are turned over to IIROC and other self regulatory agencies)

Be It Resolved #4
That the Alberta Government, under Alberta Finance, will establish a non-industry-funded agency, solely dedicated to the protection of investors from financial abuses of a systemic nature. An watchdog agency of consumer protection, without the conflict of interest involved in also having to serve the masters of industry.
This agency shall work to restore and rebuild trust and confidence in Alberta Security Protection by ensuring that the Criminal Code is the foundational basis of ethical behaviour for the Financial Industry, rather than the current practice of allowing “self” regulators to ignore criminal code violations by the investment industry.

[admin]

PRIME TIME for SYSTEMIC CRIME (CRM2)


"These efforts are part of an industry-wide initiative known as Client Relationship Model - Stage 2 (CRM2).

The industry has been hard at work setting the stage for a new client obfuscation effort, which is known by the acronym CRM2 (CRIME2)

.  Deception of the client is nearly 100% complete and successful.

For a client-relationship model to work towards perfect client confusion and deception it must meet rigorous industry tests:

1.  It MUST hide from the public the exact license and registration category of the so-called professional, so that the public can be mis-informed about the legal protective-duty owed to clients.

 (Check)  (use of a non legal word “advisor” to deceive investors into belief they have the legal “adviser”)

2.  It must DISTRACT and DECEIVE the public in a manner so subtle that the average person will deny that something such as this is possible in a country like Canada.

 (Check)  (use cognitive dissonance to allow investors to "fool themselves”) (No one knows that "advisor" does not means the same as "adviser” under securities law, thanks TO CRM2)

3.  Hide concepts such as “agency-duty”, or “agency-disclosure” from CRM2 so that the question is never asked who the “dealing representative” truly represents.

(Check)  (Any real estate salesperson MUST DISCLOSE dual-agency or split-loyalties to clients…..but investment salespersons hide this from millions of consumers…thanks to CRM2)

4.  Complicate the license-search page so the average investor can not find if their investment representative is licensed in the category they claim.

(Check)  (Go to the CSA Securities Registration Search page, type in your “advisor’s” name and see to find out what their exact registration category is……then see if you can find out what that license (“dealing representative”) means.  (Dealing Representative means they represent the dealer, not the client:)  CRM2 hides this essential information from investment clients.

5.  Use “self” regulators to pretend as if they are organizations protective of the public interest.

 (Check)  (IFIC, IIROC, MFDA, etc., are all 100% industry paid, and are counted on to ensure that the investment industry can harvest as much revenue as possible from the public, without recourse)

6.  Buy 8-page financial literacy inserts in “business” newspapers **so that the advertising revenues to those agencies will “offset” any interest in reporting on the “obfuscation games”.

(Check)  (Financial capture of a near-financially-bankrupt media ensures that only one side of the story will be “reported” to the public)

7.  Let the public be fooled by a new and improved “consumer protection" label, while concealing that it is “industry protection”.

 (Check) (consumers have no idea they are being deceived)

As Will Rogers said,

“It is easier to fool a man, than to convince him that he has been fooled”

.  Thanks to CRM2, banks and investment dealers have succeeded in fooling all of their clients, all of the time.” It is PRIME TIME for Systemic CRIME…





**Globe and Mail Special report: Investment Funds
Number of pages: 8
Publishing date: February 11, 2016

This Globe Connect sponsor content feature was prepared by RandallAnthony Communications Inc. in conjunction with the advertising department of The Globe and Mail. The Globe’s editorial department was not involved in its creation.

Views and opinions expressed in this feature are those of the individuals quoted and not The Globe and Mail.
Kind of a nice way for the Globe and Mail to excuse their conscience and wash their hands of things proclaimed to the public under its banner isn't it?
The above found on an eight page “infomercial” dressed as news by the business paper, but simply used to deceive an unsuspecting public. Thanks Globe for the “reporting?”

[admin]

December 29, 2015

Premier Rachel Notley
Alberta Legislature
10820 - 97 Avenue, Edmonton, AB

Re: This is a complaint about systemic methods by which the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) is violating and/or “exempting” Alberta Securities Act laws for the benefit of investment firms who pay the salaries of ASC employees. This is costing Albertans billions of dollars. This has gone on for decades without attention.

Rachel,

I write to you about an issue of abuse. Financial abuse by financial institutions which is affecting all Albertans, individuals, municipalities, Universities, retirement plans, pension funds.

It also illustrates where a government agency, the Alberta Securities Commission is failing in it’s mandate to PROTECT Albertans from financial abuse by financial professionals.

Screen shot 2012-06-26 at 6.00.47 PM.jpg (48.95 KiB) Viewed 5930 times

"...by ensuring those who operate in this market comply with Alberta Securities Laws. The ASC works to provide protection to Alberta investors..."

Example #1 The Alberta Securities Commission ignores public protective laws of the Alberta Securities Act at a cost to Albertans, to Alberta institutions such as the Alberta Treasury Branch, Alberta municipalities, Universities etc.

Example #2 Alberta Securities Commission routinely and regularly grants “exemptive relief” from Alberta Securities laws, with no public notice, no warning, nor public input into the reasons or the risks. This also has the effect of costing Albertans millions while benefitting investment product sellers.



click to enlarge image

"last year, Alberta-based issuers raised approximately $11.6 Billion ......by relying on exemptions from the Securities Act of Alberta"

Further to Example #1 the ASC is wilfully blind to thousands of industry registrants who are legally registered in the capacity of “dealing representative” (formerly called salesperson’s or known as “brokers”). Thousands of such product sellers who owe no legal fiduciary duty to protect investors are flaunting Alberta laws and calling themselves by another, separate license category. This is contrary to the Alberta Securities Act, while the ASC turns a blind eye and ignores enforcement of this law.

This has the effect of misrepresenting a financial person who DOES NOT have to place the interests of Alberta’s first, as someone who DOES place the interests of Alberta’s first. This is tantamount to a fraudulent misrepresentation and is a failure to follow Alberta law (section 100).

This is like a person referring to themselves as a “doctor” without having the proper license, qualifications, or protective obligations (the “do no harm” oath) to the public. It is an illegal activity as well as an immoral one, and yet the ASC acts wilfully blind to this common practice which has the effect of deceiving millions of consumers and investors.

The City of Lethbridge is missing nearly $30 million dollars after taking financial “advice” from one such person, who was legally licensed as a “salesperson”, while representing himself illegally as an “advisor”. Millions of other Albertans face this same deception every day with their life savings.

I ask specifically that the government require the ASC to address, explain, correct, or be held accountable to Albertans for being unwilling or unable to protect Albertans from thousands of these misrepresentations, contrary to Section 100 of the Alberta Securities Act.

Example #2 is the ASC granting “exemptive relief” (permission to NOT have to follow Alberta law, the Alberta Securities Act). This occurs up to 500 or more times in some years, and is done in a near-silent-to the public fashion. Members of the public are not informed when investment products they may purchase have been sold without the full protections of Alberta laws. There is usually no public notice given, nor ability for the public to be informed, to provide input, or to protest these seemingly one-sided “deals”.

The ASC most often used statement to justify these “exemptions” to our laws is just the following statement, “each of the decision makers, is satisfied that the conditions required to make the decision, has been met”.

This is government gobbledygook and is indicative of the arbitrary, haphazard, and reckless manner in which the fundamental protective laws of Alberta are being flaunted by this agency.

Examples include allowing banks to dump poorly performing investment under-writings (slow selling investment products) into the mutual fund holdings of bank customers, without notice, and in apparent conflict of interest. (advantages to banks, disadvantages to clients).

Other examples include allowing investments without proper ratings and safety, to be sold, which has resulted in billions of dollars being lost to consumers, investors, cities, towns, universities, pension funds and so on. These exemptions to our laws benefit the investment industry while allowing illegal, risky or unsafe products to be dumped off the books of investment sellers and onto the backs of unsuspecting consumers.

These acts of willful blindness to Alberta laws, and secret permissions to allow intentional violations of Alberta laws are contrary to the protective intentions of why the Alberta Securities Commission was established, and I again ask to be investigated thoroughly, by a full review of this agency, and the proper changes put in place to ensure professional, and ethical protection of Albertan’s life savings. I would like to be allowed to present information and answer questions of any government review of agencies such as the Alberta Securities Commission.

Larry Elford
103 - 7A Ave South
Lethbridge AB T1J 1N3 lelford@shaw.ca









The following captured image (from an Ontario Government report into the Ontario Securities Commission (2011?) is illustrative of how provincial Securities Commissions in Canada fail in their public protective functions and cost the country billions. The loss to Canada (and gain to those the OSC, ASC etc., regulate) was in the neighbourhood of $35 billion dollars and is considered to be Canada’s largest financial crime/loss to date.

It must be pointed out, that in addition to the points listed below, that provincial Securities Commissions actually granted “exemption from the law” to allow these “investments” to be sold to Canadians/Albertans. They did this, as always in semi-secrecy, with no warning to investors or to the public. Just who does the provincial regulator serve? It is NOT protecting the public.

Screen%20shot%202011-09-03%20at%209.14.40%20AM.jpg (56.25 KiB) Viewed 5930 times

click to enlarge image, click again to zoom in/back out

[admin]

After the Crash: How Software Models Doomed the Markets
Overreliance on financial software crafted by physics and math PhDs helped to precipitate the Wall Street collapse
By The Editors | Nov 17, 2008

If Hollywood makes a movie about the worst financial crisis since the Great De­­pres­­sion, a basement room in a government building in Washington will serve as the setting for a key scene. There investment bankers from the largest institutions pleaded successfully with Securities and Ex­­change Commission (SEC) officials during a short meeting in 2004 to lift a rule specifying debt limits and capital reserves needed for a rainy day. This decision, a real event described in the New York Times, freed billions to invest in complex mortgage-backed securities and derivatives that helped to bring about the financial meltdown in September.

In the script, the next scene will be the one in which number-savvy specialists that Wall Street has come to know as quants consult with their superiors about implementing the regulatory change. These lapsed physicists and mathematical virtuosos were the ones who both invented these oblique securities and created software models that supposedly measured the risk a firm would incur by holding them in its portfolio. Without the formal requirement to maintain debt ceilings and capital reserves, the commission had freed these firms to police themselves using risk tools crafted by cadres of quants.

The software models in question estimate the level of financial risk of a portfolio for a set period at a certain confidence level. As Benoit Mandelbrot, the fractal pioneer who is a longtime critic of mainstream financial theory, wrote in Scientific American in 1999, established modeling techniques presume falsely that radically large market shifts are unlikely and that all price changes are statistically independent; today’s fluctuations have nothing to do with tomorrow’s—and one bank’s portfolio is unrelated to the next’s. Here is where reality and rocket science diverge. Try Googling “financial meltdown,” “contagion” and “2008,” a search that reveals just how wrongheaded these assumptions were.


This modern-day tragedy could be framed not only as a major motion picture but also as a train wreck or plane crash. In aviation, controlled flight into terrain describes the actions of a pilot who, through inattention or incompetence, directs a well-functioning airplane into the side of a mountain. Wall Street’s version stems from the SEC’s decision to allow overreliance on risk software in the middle of a historic housing bubble. The heady environment permitted traders to enter overoptimistic assumptions and faulty data into their models, jiggering the software to avoid setting off alarm bells.

The causes of this fiasco are multifold—the Federal Reserve’s easy-money policy played a big role—but the rocket scientists and geeks also bear their share of the blame. After the crash, the quants and traders they serve need to accept the necessity for a total makeover. The government bailout has already left the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve with extraordinary powers. The regulators must ensure that the many lessons of this debacle are not forgotten by the institutions that trade these securities. One important take-home message: capital safety nets (now restored) should never be slashed again, even if a crisis is not looming.

For its part, the quant community needs to undertake a search for better models—perhaps seeking help from behavioral economics, which studies irrationality of investors’ decision making, and from virtual market tools that use “intelligent agents” to mimic more faithfully the ups and downs of the activities of buyers and sellers. These number wizards and their superiors need to study lessons that were never learned during previous market smashups involving intricate financial engineering: risk management models should serve only as aids not substitutes for the critical human factor. Like an airplane, financial models can never be allowed to fly solo.



http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... the-crash/

[admin]

A 25 page call for a public inquiry into failures and misconduct of the Alberta Securities Commission, 2015.

It could contain 2500 pages if the entire record of this agency was taken into account, but then it would not get read. Here is a snippet of recent history of the ASC.

Click on any of the images to zoom in closer, or click on the PDF link below to see the 25 page snapshot of harms to the public from the ASC. Harms to your very retirement security.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzE_LM ... sp=sharing

[admin]

#96 billion out of pockets of investors... to investment banks, since this article written in 2007

Canada suffers $10B 'discount'

OTTAWA -

The lack of a single securities regulator in Canada costs the economy as much as $10 billion and 65,000 jobs a year

, according to a U.S. securities law expert commissioned to advise the federal government.

BY THE EDMONTON JOURNAL SEPTEMBER 18, 2007


OTTAWA - The lack of a single securities regulator in Canada costs the economy as much as $10 billion and 65,000 jobs a year, according to a U.S. securities law expert commissioned to advise the federal government.

John Coffee, a professor at Columbia University law school in New York, said Monday he based his figures on various existing studies.

"There is a discount on Canadian securities," he said. "You have to sell more of your stock to raise the same money in comparison, say, to a similar U.S. company. And you may have to pay more on your debt rate, too."

The so-called Canadian "discount" stems from the fact investors are less confident about putting money into Canadian public companies, he said.

The reason for this is

they feel the Canadian system, which has 13 provincial and territorial agencies that monitor the industry, leads to less reliable enforcement of public companies and can lead to poorer corporate governance.

Less checks on activities such as insider trading, Coffee noted, result in a lower level of return for ordinary investors.


[url]http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=178476dd-1696-440e-937b-2ee0e0355053#__federated=1
[/url]

[admin]

the OSC is helping to "head fake" the public into a false sense of trust and reliance……upon people who are hiding their true duty, license and motivations….

WHEN WILL THE ASC, OSC (and other Provincial regulators) GIVE THE PUBLIC A "KYFA DISCLOSURE" (Know Your Fake Advisor:)

A friend sent this OSC initiative to me today and asked if I would look it over and share (support it) with others. On the surface it does appear to be a positive step in the right direction, and ordinarily I would say BRAVO!!

However upon opening up the web link and looking at it for 30 seconds, I found it appeared more like another weak attempt to dupe and set up the public, for a financial beating (or cheating:)……read my comments below, but first, here is the page in question:

http://www.getsmarteraboutmoney.ca/tool ... V3DwutHcUV

============================My reply==============================

Thanks for this, and it is a great start, but the flaws which are concealed are too large to support. I hope you will understand my reluctance after I tell you why I feel this way.

Perhaps I am too jaded at this point to be of any use to the process, but I only needed a glance at the first page to see the industry traps which remain cleverly hidden from the public.

Trap #1 is that the document talks about helping the "advisor" understand the client ("An IPS is a helpful tool for your advisor to have") and I agree completely,

however, the even more helpful tool would today be an KYA form, or a "know your Advisor" statement of facts and information for the benefit and education of the client.

As it stands, I am of the opinion, that the greatest risk today for an investor is the risk that they will be led into a false sense of trust and reliance, with a person who does not have to place their interests first,

….as well as a person who is hugely incentivized by the dealer who sponsors their license (as a "dealing" representative) to NOT place the best interests of the client as priority.

These hidden risks are of paramount importance, while letting the "advisor" get to know the client better is not going to help the client. It will however help the predatory advisor and his or her sponsoring dealer.

Trap #2
The first question posed, asked "how much reliance the client wished to place on the "advisor", and gave the client the choices of either "light, medium or heavy". As this is one of five essential legal tests that any abused client will face (by the courts) to determine if they were in a fiduciary relationship (a relationship of sole loyalty to client), it occurs to me that to misdirect clients with this fluffy, pre-ordained-to-be useless, question is an an example of attempts to intentionally set the client up to fail if ever a complaint may be made by the client against the dealer.

I feel that this is a facade-step in the correct direction, (a head fake if you will allow the sports analogy) while being intentionally misleading and harmful to the interests of the client.

Like the KYC form, which is set up in a manner

to prepare, in advance, the case which would prevent the client getting a fair, honest or good faith result in any dispute,

and to use anything the client reveals in a manner against them. I believe this form should come with a "Miranda rights" warning:

"anything you tell your broker in this particular questionnaire, can and will be used against you if you ever enter into a dispute with your "advisor".

See here for my own experience (now in my fourth decade of industry experience) as to how the KYC is used to set clients up before the relationship is even begun: https://youtu.be/G0eqlwSUpH8

Sorry for the rant, but this document appears to me to be just another brick in the wall of setting up the client to fail.

We need a KYFA Form. (Know Your Fake Advisor)

https://youtu.be/1S-_vz7GrIQ
Larry

[admin]

http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/About_accou ... _index.htm

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:43 PM, larry elford <lelford@shaw.ca> wrote:

wow…….all those OSC accountability rules and they still find a way to:

1. exempt the law for those people who pay them, without even much of a notice to the public

2. allow $35 billion to be cheated out of Canadians due to ABCP sub-prime junk paper

3. Allow $25 billion a year (U of T 2007 study) to be cheated out of mutual fund investors and into the pockets of the dealers who pay the OSC salaries.

4. fail to even hold dealers/salesperson to the simple principle of not using a "pumped up title" to represent themselves, rather than the license and registration issued by the OSC/CSA (bait and switch scam for every retail investor)

I could go on, to an extent where my numbers suggest it costs Canadians $1 bil per WEEK, each and every week out of investors pockets…….INTO the pockets of dealers and commission sales reps…..and all it requires is paying millions to a captured regulator.

Easy money.

Even if it were ONLY the $500 mil each week that the U of T study (on mutual funds alone) concludes, it has thus caused perhaps a WEALTH TRANSFER TO DEALERS (and their accomplices) of $800 billion dollars since I began my career in 1984…….pretty good return just to choose and pay a few hundred "regulators"……


Larry

sources and links to claims above

1. http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=143

2. http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=140

3. http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=177

4. http://www.investoradvocates.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193#p3775

Securities regulators are to the investment industry which feeds them, in a manner similar as the sock puppet is to the hand...

share as widely as you wish:) It is just my opinion.


http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/About_accou ... _index.htm