Click here to contact us
About Us News Alerts Articles Caveat Emptor SNSFE News Research Calendar Contact Search
Register FreeOpinion


FinancialCounsel.com
World Wide Web


2004-2007 Alerts


2007 Alerts
2006 Alerts
2005 Alerts
2004 Alerts
2003 Alerts
2002 Alerts
2001 Alerts
2000 Alerts
1999 Alerts
1998 Alerts
1997 Alerts


2006 Alerts
2005 Alerts
2004 Alerts
2003 Alerts
2002 Alerts


2007 Alerts
2006 Alerts
2005 Alerts
2004 Alerts
2003 Alerts
2002 Alerts
2001 Alerts
2000 Alerts
1999 Alerts
1998 Alerts
1997 Alerts


2006 Alerts
2004 Alerts
2000 Alerts


2003 Alerts
2002 Alerts
2001 Alerts
2000 Alerts

Click here to read more publications by and about James J. Eccleston.

Back to Investment Alerts


E*Trade Securities Ordered to Compensate Investors for Losses

A National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) arbitration panel awarded $203,333 to a customer of E*Trade Securities, as full reimbursement for his trading losses suffered in purchasing theglobe.com (TGLO).

Order Mishandling and Misrepresentations Regarding Margin Account Purchasing Power

The customer placed a market order in his margin account for the purchase of 5,000 shares of TGLO shortly before the market opened on November 13, 1998. TGLO was not priced because that day was the first day of its public trading.

The customer claimed that E*Trade had represented that it would not allow a purchase unless the customer had sufficient buying power in his margin account to cover the purchase.

TGLO's opening was delayed for approximately 2 hours due to tremendous demand for the stock. An E*Trade trader estimated that the price of TGLO would be no more than $27 per share. However, the customer argued that E*Trade should have assumed a far higher price due to market indications.

In fact, TGLO opened at $90.00 per share. The customer's order was filled in an amount almost three times his margin account purchasing power. The stock promptly fell in price.

Failure to Know Customer and the TGLO Order

The customer argued that E*Trade had a duty to know that the TGLO order was well above his financial means. E*Trade asserted that it was unable to review this customer's order given the extreme demand that TGLO presented on November 13, 1998. The customer countered that lack of capacity to appropriately review orders is no defense.

[Ed. Note: Eccleston & Associates, which sponsors www.fiancialcounsel.com, obtained the award.]

Source: Various, including Wall Street Journal, October 24, 2000, Chicago Tribune, October 29, 2000, and Chicago Sun - Times, October 27, 2000


   
 
 
 
 



About Us | News | Alerts | Articles | Caveat Emptor | SNSFE News | Research | Calendar | Contact
Register | Free Opinion

Sponsored by James J. Eccleston, an attorney representing stockbrokers, financial planners and investors nationwide in arbitration, litigation and regulatory matters, and a shareholder with the law firm Shaheen, Novoselsky, Staat, Filipowski & Eccleston P.C.(www.snsfe-law.com). This Web site contains material of general interest. It is neither intended to, nor constitutes, either legal advice or investment advice. Always consult an attorney and/or investment advisor when building and protecting your wealth.

All content Copyright © 2005-2007 FinancialCounsel.com, Inc. except where noted. All rights reserved.

20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2900, Chicago, Illinois 60606
Telephone: 312-621-4400   |   Fax: 312-621-0268