the mock exam with Sang-Gyung June case scenario: q5, is the answer A. is A: the interests of clients must be given priority over accounts in which Upsala’s employees are beneficial owners. ? I think part of the answer is missing for me. Anybody have any idea? THanks.
from what i can remember it is A. all of the other ones had regular clients getting priority over clients of the firm who were family members. family members, as long as the employee doesn’t have a personal interest in the account, should be treated like any other client.
the same scenario: for q1, is the answer B? C is vague, as even if a offer was given, Jun need to accepted, and actually left the firm, then after that he could solicit the clients. let me know how you think. Thanks.
i don’t remember the choices exactly. but i do know you can’t solicit until you have left the firm.
The answer is B
I felt like that question was poorly written. It looks like they fumbled an attempt to draw a distinction between family members who have legitimate accounts whereby no employee has a pecuniary interest in the account (example: parents’ retirement fund); as opposed to a an account where the employee definitely has an interest (spouse account for example). It looks like they are fishing for A as the answer because the “explanation” PDF only mentions employees.
is a spouse’s account always a restricted account? i.e. is “broker” spouse always deemed to have beneficial interest???.. thanks in advance!!!.. one thing i find frustrating is that broker courses (series 7 etc.) make this stuff crystal clear and seem alot tougher and common sense
I had to read through the options a few times because A didn’t include firm accounts. The other options all contained “family accounts” which, although poorly identified, have to be treated with the same level of priority as any other client accounts. edit: this is referring to Q5
i think mock 1 q1 was B.
The employee does have beneficial interest in any account held by their immediate family (minor son/daughter, wife).
mcleod, thanks, much appreciated!!