THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 21. During the period between May 2003 and July 2004, Investors Group adopted additional practices and procedures to prevent and detect market timing that could reasonably be expected to be harmful to the IG Funds and unitholders of IG Funds.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 25. Since January 2016 the Respondent no longer conducts his general practice as set out in paragraphs 6 to 8 of this Agreement and is conducting client transactions in accordance with IG’s policies and procedures.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 32. The Respondent and Xxxxxxx were diligent in preventing any threat of harm to clients by verifying, in the ordinary course, that all impugned payments (as set out above) would not create an illiquid position for the Member.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 18. The Respondent states that he has not been the subject of prior MFDA regulatory proceedings. The Respondent further states that even though no known client complaints were made as a result of the facts described in Part IV, he ought to have known that his admitted-to misconduct was in violation of MFDA Rules, Policies and By-laws. Nevertheless, he regrets his conduct and fully accepts responsibility for his actions, including the consequential penalties agreed to herein.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 19. On December 7, 2007, the Respondent provided the Ontario Securities Commission with an affidavit in which he admitted to the falsification of approximately 10 client KYC forms. On October 7, 2008, the Respondent attended an interview with Staff of the MFDA and identified 11 KYC forms which he had falsified.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 22. The Respondent states that client MB had been a close friend since childhood.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 23. The following are representations made by the Respondent. Staff is unable to confirm or verify the accuracy of the representations:
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 242. The Respondent’s second jurisdictional objection arises from NAFTA Article 1116(2), which reads: An investor may not make a claim if more than three years have elapsed from the date on which the investor first acquired, or should have first acquired, knowledge of the alleged breach and knowledge that the investor has incurred loss or damage.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 28. The Respondent believed that he could not correct the ICAN Form Deficiency within the time period specified by the BCO due to client JP’s work schedule.
THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION. 28. The Respondent states that he maintained and used blank or partially completed pre- signed forms to process transactions in client accounts and delayed, at his discretion, the processing of transactions in client accounts because he was working close to 50 hours a week and was unable to process the trades on the same day that he had met with the client(s). The Respondent states that he informed Xxxxxxxxxx verbally about difficulties he was having with his workload, the “pending” files and the delayed transactions, but did not indicate to Credential the extent and severity to which he had fallen behind with his work.