MFDA Hearing Panel makes findings against Sandra Levine
TORONTO, March 8, 2013 /CNW/ - A disciplinary hearing in the matter of Sandra Levine (the "Respondent") was held today in Toronto, Ontario before a three-person Hearing Panel of the MFDA's Central Regional Council. The Hearing Panel found that the allegations against the Respondent in the Notice of Hearing dated August 3, 2012 had been established and imposed the following sanctions and costs on the Respondent at the conclusion of the hearing:
- a permanent prohibition from conducting securities related business in any capacity while in the employ of or associated with any MFDA Member;
- a fine of $25,000; and
- costs of $7,500.
The Notice of Hearing contained the following allegations:
Allegation #1: Between November 23, 2006 and January 5, 2010, the Respondent deposited in her personal bank account 45 cheques worth a total of $52,300 drawn on the bank account of client HD and made payable to the Respondent personally and used the monies for her benefit, thereby engaging in personal financial dealings with a client which gave rise to a conflict or potential conflict of interest between the interests of the Respondent and the interests of client HD, which the Respondent failed to ensure was addressed by the exercise of responsible business judgment influenced only by the best interests of client HD, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.1.4 and 2.1.1.
Allegation #2: Between November 23, 2006 and January 5, 2010, the Respondent falsified the signature of client HD on at least 11 cheques drawn on client HD's personal bank account and made payable to the Respondent personally, which the Respondent then deposited in her personal bank account, thereby failing to observe high standards of ethics and conduct in the transaction of business, contrary to MFDA Rule 2.1.1.
Allegation #3: On June 18, 2008, the Respondent became designated as a beneficiary to a client HD's segregated fund account with the Respondent's knowledge and approval, thereby giving rise to a conflict or potential conflict of interest between the interests of client HD and the interests of the Respondent which the Respondent failed to ensure was addressed by the exercise of responsible business judgment influenced only by the best interests of client HD, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.1.4 and 2.1.1.
Allegation #4: Commencing on November 23, 2006, the Respondent failed to comply with the policies and procedures of the Member in respect of conflicts of interest by depositing in her personal bank account cheques worth a total of $53,200 drawn on the bank account of client HD and knowingly becoming a beneficiary to client HD's segregated fund account, thereby interfering the ability of the Member to supervise the Respondent and to comply with its obligations under MFDA Rule 2.1.4, contrary to MFDA Rules 1.1.2 and 2.5.1, and MFDA Rule 2.1.1.
The MFDA is the self-regulatory organization for Canadian mutual fund dealers, regulating the operations, standards of practice and business conduct of its 115 Members and their approximately 80,000 Approved Persons with a mandate to protect investors and the public interest.
SOURCE Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada