Disciplinary Debacle: Hits James R. Dickie in FINRA AWC

James R. Dickie, a resident of Rancho Cordova, California, was the target of a regulatory action on October 10, 2023, when the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued an Administrative Waiver and Consent (AWC) against him.

The AWC imposed a severe punishment, barring Dickie from working with any FINRA member in any capacity for an extended eight months. Notably, given Dickie’s financial situation, the disciplinary actions did not involve any financial penalties.

Dickie’s participation in a business transaction in which he obtained $9,000 from a client of his member firm gave rise to the AWC. According to the results, James R. Dickie did not ask for or receive written pre-approval from the company to conduct this Outside Business Activity (OBA) and to accept payment from a customer in connection with it.

In addition, he failed to notify the company of this transaction, which shows a lack of openness and compliance with legal requirements.

Dickie accepted the eight-month suspension that followed his acknowledgment of the regulatory violations by agreeing to the sanctions without contesting the findings.

Dickie’s financial situation was taken into account during the regulatory process, as evidenced by the lack of financial penalties despite the seriousness of the violation.

This case serves as a reminder of the significance of following legal requirements, making accurate disclosures, and dealing with financial professionals who engage in activities outside the purview of their member firms without the necessary authorizations.

James R. Dickie was subject to increased regulatory scrutiny after several troubling actions were revealed in the findings surrounding his disciplinary case. The investigation revealed that he had received $9,000 from a member firm customer for an investment that was allegedly intended to finance the renovation of a car.

The appropriateness of the financial transaction and its compliance with industry regulations were called into question by this revelation.

The results also revealed that Dickie had filled out biannual compliance questionnaires, in which he had confirmed that he had disclosed to his supervisory principal any Outside Business Activities (OBAs) for which he was expecting payment.

Furthermore, he agreed that before entering into any OBAs, written consent was required. The regulatory expectations regarding openness and the approval procedures for these kinds of activities were emphasized by this acknowledgment.

The investigation also discovered that Dickie purposefully neglected to update his Uniform Application for the Securities Industry Registration or Transfer (Form U4) with the charges he had been facing as soon as possible.

His failure to disclose raised questions about the completeness and accuracy of his regulatory disclosures, which is a crucial component in preserving the securities industry’s integrity.

Together, these results demonstrated a lack of adherence to regulatory standards, casting doubt on Dickie’s commitment to openness, the processes used for OBA approval, and the truthful reporting of legal matters on his Form U4.

Dickie’s regulatory action serves as a reminder of the strict standards that financial professionals must uphold to maintain transparency, follow compliance procedures, and give regulatory authorities accurate and timely disclosures.

James R. Dickie‘s behavior was investigated, and the findings showed a serious breach in regulatory compliance. The results, in particular, brought to light Dickie’s deliberate neglect to update his Uniform Application for the Securities Industry Registration or Transfer (Form U4) as soon as possible to include the information that he was being investigated for multiple felonies.

A serious breach of regulatory requirements, this omission casts doubt on Dickie’s disclosures’ completeness and accuracy, which are crucial for preserving the integrity and transparency of the securities market.

To make matters worse, James R. Dickie neglected to update his Form U4 and did not notify his firm of the impending charges or the felony charges that were listed on it at any point.

The failure to disclose pertinent information about a securities professional’s legal history on time constitutes a grave violation of regulatory requirements, which are meant to guarantee that relevant information is easily accessible to both regulatory bodies and the general public.

The seriousness of the situation further increased when the firm filed a Form U4 amendment with false information on Dickie’s behalf. To be exact, Dickie added to the deception by providing a false response to a question about felonies.

The investigation showed that neither Dickie nor the company corrected this misrepresentation in the record, underscoring a failure to maintain the accuracy of disclosures mandated by regulatory agencies.

These results, taken together, highlight some significant regulatory violations, such as the deliberate omission of felonies, the updating of incriminating disclosure documents, and the filing of false information on official forms.

Such noncompliance not only damages the reputation of the individual in the industry but also undermines the regulatory framework’s capacity to uphold transparency, protect investor interests, and preserve the integrity of the securities market.

SUMMARY REPORT: JAMES R. DICKIE

CASE SUMMARY	FIRMS/INDIVIDUALS	ACTION DATE
Letter of acceptance, waiver, and consent dated 2022076282801 from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to the Department of Enforcement RE: James R. Dickie, CRD No. 4465359, Respondent, Former General Securities Representative Respondent James R. Dickie submits this Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) per FINRA Rule 9216 to suggest a settlement for the alleged rule violations listed below. This AWC is being submitted with the understanding that should it be approved, the Respondent will not be the subject of any further actions by FINRA alleging violations based on the same factual findings as this AWC. CASE ID: 2022076282801	JAMES R. DICKIE	10/10/23

CONCLUSION

An overview of the disciplinary action that FINRA brought against James R. Dickie, a former broker who had received money from a customer of his member firm and had misreported it.

According to the text, Dickie agreed to the findings and the sanction, which included not changing his Form U4 to disclose felony charges, an eight-month ban from associating with any FINRA member, and no financial penalties.

It is also mentioned in the text that Dickie completed and initialed biannual compliance questionnaires certifying that he had disclosed to his supervising principal all OBAs for which he was reasonably expected to be compensated and that he was aware that he needed written consent before participating in any OBAs.

According to the text, Dickie’s actions hurt the interests of the customer and went against industry regulations. The nature of the OBA and the resolution of the felony charges brought against Dickie are not mentioned in the text.