{"id":1671,"date":"2015-07-02T16:03:02","date_gmt":"2015-07-02T16:03:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.stockbrokerfraudblog.com\/2015\/07\/sec_appeals_its_inhouse_agency"},"modified":"2021-11-12T13:08:36","modified_gmt":"2021-11-12T19:08:36","slug":"sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/","title":{"rendered":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds"},"content":{"rendered":"

\t\t\t\tSecurities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers accused of not notifying clients that Fidelity Investments (FNF) had paid them to sell specific mutual funds. In the Texas securities case<\/a>, SEC Administrative Law Judge James E. Grimes rejected claims that The Robare Group and two of its owners violated the law by failing to adequately disclose that they had a financial relationship with the brokerage firm. Grimes said that from listening to Mark L. Robare and his son-in-law Jack L. Jones Jr. testify, he was hard pressed to imagine them attempting to bilk anyone. This is one of the few cases presided over by one of its judges that the SEC has lost.<\/p>\n

Fidelity is The Robare Group’s custodian. For the last 11 years, the registered investment advisor has been part of a program in which Fidelity pays it a portion of the revenue earned from the sale of certain third-party mutual funds. The payment goes to the adviser who made the mutual fund sale happen.<\/p>\n

Advisors are given access to the funds without any transaction fees. As the custodian, Fidelity refers to payments made to advisers not as commission but as compensation for shareholder administrative fees. <\/p>\n

In their appeal, the SEC staffers said that they feared Grimes’ ruling in this case establishes a troubling precedent that shifts the burden of full disclosure of a conflict interest from an investment adviser to a compliance consultant. They said this could allow an investment adviser to be excused from certain securities violations as long as he has a compliance consultant that has not “affirmatively” objected to a “particular disclosure.”
\n Continue Reading \u203a<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers accused of not notifying clients that Fidelity Investments (FNF) had paid them to sell specific mutual funds. In the Texas securities case, SEC Administrative Law Judge James E. Grimes rejected claims that The Robare Group […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3799,3801,3760,3750],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1671","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-mutual-funds","category-sec","category-sec-enforcement","category-texas-securities-fraud"],"yoast_head":"\nSEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 2, 2015<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers — July 2, 2015\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 2, 2015\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers — July 2, 2015\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 2, 2015","description":"Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers — July 2, 2015","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 2, 2015","twitter_description":"Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers — July 2, 2015","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/"},"author":{"name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"headline":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds","datePublished":"2015-07-02T16:03:02+00:00","dateModified":"2021-11-12T19:08:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/"},"wordCount":546,"articleSection":["Mutual Funds","SEC","SEC Enforcement","Texas Securities Fraud"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/","name":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds — Investor Lawyers Blog — July 2, 2015","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2015-07-02T16:03:02+00:00","dateModified":"2021-11-12T19:08:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"description":"Securities and Exchange Commission employees are appealing a ruling by an administrative law judge dismissing charges against two financial advisers — July 2, 2015","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-appeals-its-inhouse-agency\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SEC Appeals Its In-House Agency Judge\u2019s Decision to Throw Out Charges Against Financial Advisers Paid by Fidelity to Push Specific Mutual Funds"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/","name":"Investor Lawyers Blog","description":"Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys \u2014 Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431","name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pedX9K-qX","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1671","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1671"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1671\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20879,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1671\/revisions\/20879"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1671"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1671"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1671"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}