Why would you want to open up an account again with the same broker if you still owe money to? Just because the broker won't send pulp fiction guys to your home for the collection doesn't mean it's a good idea. LOL I imagine it would be easier to say the least to open an account with a different broker the 2nd time around, no?
Just make certain that the "new" new account form has no misleading information on it. If there is an unsatisfied judgment chances are they won't open the new account no matter what the legal entity structure. Don't assume for a moment that even if you change brokers they won't know. Again make sure the new account form is accurate and has no material omissions.
That is an interesting thought there Speedo... Let us say, for example, that your large account was 20K, and the couple smaller ones (we'll say 2 of them) were 5 K each... So you "blew up" 3 accounts for 30K total. BUT! What if all of that 30K was in a 100K account? Would it still be considered blowing up, or just a bad loss? The definition of "blowing up" has always been a bit fuzzy to me, since losing 5K in a $100K account 5 times is generally not considered the same as losing 5K in 5 5K accounts. (Sorry OP, was just going all thought-process there. As to your question, I see no reason why your broker would not allow you to trade with them again so long as you pay back the debt which you owe. If you then default later on, the process begins again. But I would think that you should ALWAYS pay back your debts to a brokerage before you attempt to open an account with another. Otherwise you would appear to be "brokerage hopping", akin to "doctor shopping", when you just can't squeeze anymore Oxycontins out of your local prescribing doctor.)
*clucks* You know man...The fact that you are still here and making money, means that you never really did "blow up an account". You just had some bad losses. Think about it. Your "account" is everything you ever put into the thing (trading). If you lose 95% of it all, and then suddenly turn it around and make back all that was lost, and then make 100% of what you originally put in, was there ever any real "blowup"? I'm trying very hard to get people away from this concept of "blowing up". This is certainly the wrong thread to bring this idealization up in, but I just thought of it, and, er...so mentioned it. Sorry.
Total and utter nonsense. Over 95% of revenues that brokers/sell side banks generate are with clients over which the broker does not have personal recourse and that includes any limited liability corporate structure. But because you block everyone who disagrees with you you won't learn this either. But I post it anyway for others to consider.
I still have a sleeping account at IBKR with a non-US LLC (but equivalent), I'm the 50% owner. I guess IBKR doesn't even have half a brain.