FINRA Issues Guidance about Social Networking

Broker/dealers and their reps confused about regulations regarding social networking might now have some answers.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) today issued guidance to securities firms and brokers about the use of social networking Web sites—such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and blogs—to communicate with the public. FINRA said the new notice is in response to “the expressed need for guidance explaining how FINRA rules governing communications with the public, recordkeeping and supervision apply to social networking sites.”

Regulatory Notice 10-06, which is presented in Q&A format, clarifies the responsibilities of firms to supervise the use of social networking sites to ensure that investment recommendations are “suitable” and customers are not misled, FINRA said. The Notice also addresses necessary recordkeeping, supervision, and other responsibilities of a firm.

In the notice, FINRA emphasizes that each firm must develop its own policies and procedures to supervise personnel who use social networking sites for business. It also addresses in what circumstances it is permissible to recommend specific investment products. “As a best practice, firms should consider prohibiting all interactive electronic communications that recommend a specific investment product and any link to such a recommendation unless a registered principal has previously approved the content,” according to the notice.

FINRA reiterated that firms must retain records of social media communications related to their business. Some technology providers are developing systems that are intended to enable firms to retain records of communications made through social networking sites (see “Social Networking Site for Advisers Say It Is FINRA-Compliant”). For instance, advisers can find applications that will capture and save tweets from Twitter. However, FINRA said that it does not endorse any particular technology to keep such records, “nor are we certain that adequate technology currently exists.”

Last year FINRA produced a podcast about social networking rules, which had been broadly encompassed in its Internet communication rules. However, the independent regulator decided that brokers needed more specific guidance. In the fall, FINRA announced it had formed a task force to further examine social networking regulations (see “Think before You Tweet”).

“Social networking sites and blogs raise new regulatory challenges, particularly in the areas of supervision, advertising and books and records requirements,” said FINRA Chairman and CEO Rick Ketchum, in a news release. “Our goal in issuing this notice is to ensure that firms and brokers use social networking sites in an appropriate manner.”





Stock-Drop Suit Dropped Against Sterling Financial

An employee lawsuit filed against Spokane, Washington-based Sterling Financial has been dropped—and for a most unusual reason.

According to the Puget Sound Business Journal, the suit was dropped because former Sterling employee Cory Deter said he never agreed to be involved in the case, and did not give permission for his name to be used by attorneys.      

The suit, intended to be a class action, was filed last week on behalf of Deter in federal court in Eastern Washington.  As have many of these so-called “stock-drop” suits, the lawsuit alleged that Sterling failed to protect employees’ investments in company stock through their 401(k) plans. However, on Thursday, the suit was dismissed by Seattle-based Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, the law firm that filed the complaint.      

In an interview with the Puget Sound Business Journal, Deter said he gave Pennsylvania-based law firm Brodsky & Smith LLC, which was also working on the litigation, initial permission to represent him, but never filled out necessary paperwork to officially retain the firm. He also said he did not give permission for the firm to use his name as the lead plaintiff and hadn’t reviewed the complaint before it was filed.      

“I’m just kind of disgusted,” Deter said, according to the report. “I don’t have anything against Sterling or their management.”      

Deter worked in Sterling’s commercial banking department between 2006 and October 2009, when he left the bank voluntarily for another job, according to the report. He lost about $3,000 —less than a month’s worth of pay—in his 401(k) as a result of Sterling’s stock drop, and that led him to respond to a query by Brodsky & Smith on Google Finance regarding a potential class action, according to the report.Andrew Volk, an attorney at Hagens Berman who is working on the Sterling litigation, told the Business Journal that his firm was told by Brodsky & Smith that Deter had reviewed the complaint.  As soon as Volk became aware of the misunderstanding, he said, the firm pulled the lawsuit.    

E-mail communication provided to the Business Journal by Deter between him and Jason Brodsky, an attorney with Brodsky & Smith, shows that Deter did give email permission in late December for the firm to represent him, but he said “I need to find time to do the paperwork.”  Deter then told the newspaper that he left on vacation to the Caribbean for two weeks, and without filling out the paperwork—only to come back and find that the suit had been filed.     

“It’s laughable that I’m the poster boy for this,” said Deter, according to the report.

Another Suit

Meanwhile, Hagens Berman Shapiro filed another suit last week in U.S. District Court of Eastern Washington with a different former Sterling employee (Philip Laue) as the lead plaintiff. The suit contains similar allegations as the first complaint and also seeks class-action status.

“No qualified financial adviser would encourage rank-and-file employees to invest more than a modest amount of retirement savings in company stock, but actually advise against it,” said HBSS managing partner Steve Berman, in a press release. “Employees often interpret a match in company stock as an endorsement of the company and its stock. In this case, Sterling matched the stock employees invested in the 401(k) plan with worthless company stock, further putting the pension fund at risk.”

In announcing the new suit, Berman said the bank failed to disclose the company’s massive financial problems caused by inadequately secured loans in commercial real estate, construction and land loans, and masked by allegedly improper accounting. The lawsuit charges that the company deliberately misled employees and shareholders on the value of the stock and failed to secure adequate reserves against its credit portfolio.     

Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro (HBSS) is a law firm with offices in Seattle, Chicago, Cambridge, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Francisco.

«