MFDA Hearing Panel issues Reasons for Decision in the matter of Gordon Brock
May 24, 2018 (Toronto, Ontario) – A Hearing Panel of the Central Regional Council of the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada (“MFDA”) has issued its Reasons for Decision dated May 23, 2018 in connection with a settlement hearing held in Toronto, Ontario on April 16, 2018 in the matter of Gordon David Brock (“Respondent”).
In its Reasons for Decision, the Hearing Panel confirmed the sanctions imposed on the Respondent. In particular, the Respondent:
- shall pay a fine in the amount of $17,500 (“Fine”);
- has paid costs in the amount of $2,500 (“Costs”);
- the Fine and Costs described above is payable to the MFDA in certified funds as follows:
- $2,500 (Costs) shall be paid upon acceptance of the Settlement Agreement;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before May 25, 2018;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before June 29, 2018;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before July 27, 2018;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before August 31, 2018;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before September 28, 2018;
- $2,916.67 (Fine) on or before October 26, 2018;
- if he fails to make any of the payments described above, any outstanding balance of the Fine shall immediately become due and payable to the MFDA and he shall continue to be prohibited from conducting securities related business while in the employ of or associated with a Member of the MFDA until such time as the total amount outstanding of the Fine are paid to the MFDA; and
- shall in the future comply with MFDA Rules 2.3.1 and 2.1.1.
In the Settlement Agreement dated March 12, 2018, the Respondent admitted that:
- between July 28, 2011 and August 5, 2016, he obtained, possessed, and in some instances, used to process transactions, 87 pre-signed account forms in relation to 32 clients, contrary to MFDA Rule 2.1.1;
- on or about January 20, 2016, he processed four trades in relation to three clients based on the instructions of someone other than the client, contrary to MFDA Rule 2.1.1.
Copies of the Reasons for Decision and the Settlement Agreement are available on the MFDA website at www.mfda.ca. During the period described in the Reasons for Decision, the Respondent carried on business in Markham, Ontario.
The MFDA is the self-regulatory organization for Canadian mutual fund dealers, regulating the operations, standards of practice and business conduct of its Members and their approximately 82,000 Approved Persons with a mandate to protect investors and the public interest. For more information about the MFDA’s complaint and enforcement processes, as well as links to ‘Check an Advisor’ and other Investor Tools, visit the For Investors page on the MFDA website.