AGREED FACTS Registration History
6. Since 1997, the Respondent has been registered as a mutual fund salesperson (now known as Dealing Representative) in Ontario with Sun Life Financial Investment Services (Canada) Inc.1 (“Sun Life”), a member of the MFDA.
7. At all material times, the Respondent conducted business in the Waterloo, Ontario area.
1 Before merging in 2002, known as Sun Life Financial Services (Canada) Inc. and Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx Inc.
8. Between August 2006 and September 2013, the Respondent obtained, possessed, and in some instances, used to process transactions, a total of 49 blank pre-signed client account forms in respect of 27 clients.
9. Of the 49 blank pre-signed forms, which included order entry forms, Pre-Authorized Contribution Agreement forms, and Know-Your-Client forms, 17 were used.
10. Between August 2006 and September 2013, the Respondent obtained, altered, and used to process transactions, 6 order entry forms, in respect of 7 clients.
11. Sun Life’s compliance staff detected the conduct that is the subject of this Settlement Agreement as a result of an audit of the Respondent’s client files on October 31, 2013.
12. Sun Life conducted an interview with the Respondent on November 8, 2013. After the interview, on November 25, 2013, Sun Life conducted a further comprehensive audit of all the Respondent’s files, revealing further irregular forms.
13. As part of its investigation, Sun Life sent letters to all clients serviced by the Respondent to determine whether the Respondent had engaged in any unauthorized trading in their accounts. None of the clients reported any concerns to Sun Life.
14. As part of its investigation, Sun Life directed the Respondent’s Branch Manager to meet with all clients affected by the conduct that is the subject of this Settlement Agreement whose forms were submitted for processing.
15. Additionally, Sun Life telephoned 21 of the clients affected by the Respondent’s conduct. 16 of these clients reported satisfaction with the handling of their accounts, while the remaining 5 were either unreachable or unable to communicate in English.
16. The Respondent had obtained limited trade authorizations for all of the affected clients.
17. On June 16, 2014, Sun Life placed the Respondent under close supervision for a 12 month period. No compliance concerns regarding the Respondent have arisen as a result.
18. There is no evidence that the Respondent received any financial benefit from engaging in the misconduct described above beyond the commissions and fees that he would ordinarily be entitled to receive had the transactions been carried out in the proper manner.
19. The Respondent is remorseful.
20. The Respondent has not previously been the subject of MFDA disciplinary proceedings.
21. By entering into this Settlement Agreement, the Respondent has saved the MFDA the time, resources and expenses associated with conducting a full hearing of the allegations.
V. CONTRAVENTIONS
Final Decision Concessionaire covenants that the decision of the Commissioner of Department, relative to the performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall be final and conclusive.
Joint Remediation Committee If the Sellers (acting reasonably) determine that the Purchasers have committed a Major Default, then, at the election of the Sellers, within three (3) Business Days of the Sellers providing the Purchasers written notice of such determination, the Sellers and the Purchasers shall establish a joint remediation committee of designated executives from the Sellers and the Purchasers (“Joint Remediation Committee”) consisting of three (3) members of each of the Sellers and the Purchasers. The Joint Remediation Committee shall be responsible for overseeing the development of a mutually agreeable plan in accordance with subsection 3 below to either (i) remediate any breaches giving rise to the Major Default to the extent such breaches can be remediated and/or (ii) prevent similar breaches from recurring in the future (clauses (i) and (ii), a “Corrective Action Plan”). Each member of the Joint Remediation Committee shall have sufficient authority on the part of his or her respective party to make decisions relating to matters reviewed by the Joint Remediation Committee, and shall be approved by the other party (such approval not to be unreasonably delayed, conditioned or withheld). The Joint Remediation Committee shall have access to Purchaser Personnel that are primarily responsible for the area of the business relationship (such as information technology, data security or regulatory) where the breaches giving rise to the Major Default arise (such Purchaser Personnel, collectively, the “Subject Matter Experts”). The Sellers and the Purchasers shall cause their respective members on the Joint Remediation Committee to, and the Purchasers shall cause the Subject Matter Experts to, act in good faith in connection with the development of the Corrective Action Plan.
Independence and Objectivity Certification Prior to performing the first Quarterly Claims Review, and annually thereafter, the IRO shall submit to Practitioner a certification that the IRO has (a) evaluated its professional independence and objectivity with respect to the reviews required under this Section III.C and (b) concluded that it is, in fact, independent and objective, in accordance with the requirements specified in Appendix A to this IA. The IRO’s certification shall include a summary of all current and prior engagements between Practitioner and the IRO.
LEAD WARNING STATEMENT Housing built before 1978 may contain lead-based paint. Lead from paint, paint chips and dust pose health hazards if not managed properly. Lead exposure is especially harmful to young children and pregnant women. Before renting pre-1978 housing, OWNERS must disclose the presence of known lead-based paint hazards in the dwelling. RESIDENTS must also receive a federally approved pamphlet on lead poisoning prevention.
Public Posting of Approved Users’ Research Use Statement The PI agrees that information about themselves and the approved research use will be posted publicly on the dbGaP website. The information includes the PI’s name and Requester, project name, Research Use Statement, and a Non-Technical Summary of the Research Use Statement. In addition, and if applicable, this information may include the Cloud Computing Use Statement and name of the CSP or PCS. Citations of publications resulting from the use of controlled-access datasets obtained through this DAR may also be posted on the dbGaP website.
Final Approval Hearing “Final Approval Hearing” shall mean the hearing at which the Court will consider and finally decide whether to enter the Final Judgment.
Hearing Aids Any active employee who is insured under any one of the 9 District sponsored medical plans may request reimbursement for the costs of 10 hearing aids. The maximum amount of reimbursement shall not exceed one 11 thousand dollars ($1,000) within any three (3) year period. The cost of 12 hardware, fitting tests, and other tests related to the hearing aids purchased 13 shall be included for reimbursement purposes. 14
Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Independence from Material Breach Determination Except as set forth in Section X.D.1.c, these provisions for payment of Stipulated Penalties shall not affect or otherwise set a standard for OIG’s decision that Xxxxx has materially breached this IA, which decision shall be made at OIG’s discretion and shall be governed by the provisions in Section X.D, below.
