# stockbroker selling stock without notice



## yob (23 Nov 2007)

hi guys,
have a dilema,bought stock a few weeks ago,sent cheque,noticed some 10 days later account not cleared,sent email enquiring,replyed saying cheque didn't clear.phoned bank couldn't find anything out,a few days later bank contacted me saying,the clearing house thought it was fraudulent,re-issue and it will be ok.that was about 10 days ago.went on line today to find my account is still in the red,sent mail,she replyed saying they only got cheque on wednesday and everything seems ok.
when i got home from work this evening there was message on answer machine for me to call stock broker,which i duly did.the guy informed me they sold my holding because cheque didn't clear.i asked why i wasn't informed sooner to resolve the problem,am i not intitled to some notice,his reply was he phoned me at 11.10 this morning,i explained i just walked in from work and was returning his call,he said he was following directors orders,and that what they decided,i asked for stock to be reinstated he didn't have atority.
i phoned my bank they dont know anything except funs are sti;ll in account,and theyed try and find out on monday as it was to late this evening.
Q1.can the broker sell my stock without giving notice.(theyre holding alot more than the value of this stock)
Q2do i have any recall.can i get my stock reinstated
Q3.is this a matter for the financial regulater.(not once did they contact me until i initiated it)
thanks in advance for any advise,i'm absolutly furious!!as i still owe them money as the stock devalued.
yob


----------



## rmelly (23 Nov 2007)

what do your Terms & Conditions say about this?


----------



## gonk (23 Nov 2007)

I think possibly the more important question is why did your bank dishonour a vaild cheque?

The broker is probably within its rights to sell the shares, if so far as it was concerned it hadn't received payment from you for them. Maybe it could have done more to contact you, but you'll probably find that it's your responsibility to get payment to them in a timely way.

What I would be much more concerned about if I was you is why a valid cheque with funds to back it was bounced. You should be taking this up with your bank and in my view they should make up any resulting loss.


----------



## yob (24 Nov 2007)

the cheque has been rejected as it was not signed in accordance with mandate,thats what the broker was sent,i asked my branch and they dont understand it and are making further enquiries on monday.
but from what you are saying,it would appear i loose,i think i will close this account,as they had no problem excepting my signiture when lodging,i cant believe this has happened,thanks for the replies you 2,it does help.
yob


----------



## shipibo (25 Nov 2007)

Had some problems in past with Irish Stockbrokers .... also e-Trade done this to me when I setup a Margin Account with them.They sold arbitrarily , and did,nt get so much as an e-mail.

I think they can sell your shares and pass losses over to you, they will have it covered, but maybe no harm talking to regulator, although don,t expect much from this case.

Take it as a lesson, and move on.


----------



## yob (26 Nov 2007)

wow some expensive lesson.
phoned bank this morning,they agreed to do a credit transfer for me,normally i have to go into branch to do this,but there going to except a signed fax.i should mention this is a uk bank,that i've left open since i come home,and thats why i couldn't go to branch to transfer in the first place.
e-mailed broker explaining,he mailed back,confirming he was in no position to re-instate stock,and that its been passed onto one of the directors for inquiry,and he will contact me.
i've done nothing as i dont know what to do,but dont see the point in transfering the money at this stage as i cant see it working out.yob


----------



## dunkamania (27 Nov 2007)

Can you clarify how many days elapsed between settle day and when broker sold it.

I would have said its ultimately your responsibilty to fund your position and broker was within his rights to sell to cover costs. I believe brokers are being more stringent than before in closing out unfunded positions due to falling markets


----------



## yob (27 Nov 2007)

21 days had elapsed,and i agree that its my responsability to insure funds were in my account,but i thought they where,and thats my arguement,nobody contacted me and said we have a problem with your cheque,this would have saved time,and giving me the opportunity to resolve the issue,because they didn't it was some 10 days later before i realised,and then the same again with second cheque,and now the bank has just phoned to say,its ok there wont be any more problems,its a little to late says i,and i asked who will take responsability for shotfall on my share account,theres an inquiry already started was the response.


----------



## yob (3 Apr 2008)

hi all,just an up date on this matter,for the sake of education.
after some tugging and pulling of some 8 letters,the bank refused to take any responsability,and left no course but to apply to the ombudsman which i did,and is ongoing.............

sharewatch on the other hand was very helpful with a special thanks to 2 directors 1 in ireland and 1 in england,(as i've no permission to use names)
eventually i established that there was on going charges for the monies that where outstanding on my account on a daily bases???????but was advised if i settled the account these charges would be waived,on doing so,a senior director reinstated my origional purchase (at origional price)waived all charges on the account and payed divedents that had been issued some weeks before,now one might say that the price of the share has gone down and i'm no better off,but i feel it was a jesture of good will and i excepted,all be it i'll have to wait a while for the share to come back to its origional price.but its a lesson i've come out of,with minor scars it was looking a lot worse a while back,and i hope it prevents any of you guys having the same problems.
thanks for help yob


----------



## BOXtheFOX (6 Apr 2008)

Not signed in accordance with Mandate held usually means that if you had a joint bank account wherby both signatures were required on all cheques and you wrote a cheque with only one signature on it then the bank would bounce that cheque. You have to remember it is *you* who completes the mandate and instructs the bank what to do and how to act. If they bounce one of your cheques it means that you have instructed them to do so according to your mandate instructions.


----------



## dunkamania (7 Apr 2008)

I am glad thinks worked out (mostly) better for you


----------



## yob (7 Apr 2008)

well boxthefox,my mandate was for either partner to sign,what the bank is suggesting is that my signiture has altered since i opened my account,some 25yrs ago,mmm,but funny i had made some substancial lodgements weeks previously to this problem,and they excepted my signiture then,and your also forgetting the fact that they asked me to issue a second cheque and still bounced it,my instructions where hand written on a cheque and they should have administered it,period


----------



## Janman07 (9 Apr 2008)

yob said:


> 21 days had elapsed


 
21 days after the settlement date! I would say that your broker was quite patient. I do not think that you have any grounds to complain about your broker's actions. If you check the T&Cs I am sure that it will say somewhere that if you do not submit funds, you have no entitlement to the shares. You sent in an invalid cheque which is in effect, no cheque.

Your dispute is with your bank and your bank alone. Before you start down the road of arguing with your bank, can I point out that you have zero chance of compensation. All the bank will do is ensure that the mandate terms etc are set out clearly for the future.

Would you be willing to compensate your broker or the bank if your trade had moved in the opposite direction?


----------



## Virginia (17 May 2008)

I have a question. I was not pleased with my stock broker, and I notified him early April, that I was in the process of transfering my account to another firm. While waiting for the transfer, I just found out when I opened my mail, that he has been trading stock in May before the transfer ocurred, and without my approval. Is this ethical and legal?


----------



## Virginia (17 May 2008)

Virginia said:


> I have a question. I was not pleased with my stock broker, and I notified him early April, that I was in the process of transfering my account to another firm. While waiting for the transfer, I just found out when I opened my mail, that he has been trading stock in May before the transfer ocurred, and without my approval. Is this ethical and legal?


----------

