Outrageous story. The facts behind the case between Merrill and the customer are not mentioned here, however it must have been quite obvious for the FINRA arbitrators as their decision overwhelmingly went in favor of the customer, while Merrill apparently saw no possibility to win an appeal. Instead, they worked behind the scenes to stick it to the arbitrators later. Two other sordid details of the case: The customer committed suicide before the final verdict, probably because Merrill gambled away or stole his life savings. And one of the fired arbitrators now has started a whistleblower suit over FINRA practices, to be decided by the SEC, whose current head Mary Schapiro left her prior post as head of FINRA with an 8 million bonus... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-08/wall-street-s-captive-arbitrators-strike-again.html
And how is this outrageous? you wrote: The facts behind the case between Merrill and the customer are not mentioned here, however it must have been quite obvious for the FINRA arbitrators as their decision overwhelmingly went in favor of the customer so you do not know the facts and you think its quite obvious that arbitraters went overwhelmingly in favor of the customer that they were right. so what if you hear of a case and the judge ordered a death penaltly and was later removed from his post and there was no *details* of the case and you would think an overwelming punishment means the guy deserved it? fucking idiots judging shit without facts.
I agree it is unfortunate that the author of the article did not include details of the matter that originally led to the arbitration. However the fact is that ML chose not to appeal the decision. That means to me they saw very little chance in winning the same matter with a different panel of arbitrators.
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuter...ates_3_arbitrators_axed_after_Merrill_ruling/ FINRA's removal of the three arbitrators between mid-2011 and early 2012 raised questions among lawyers and others about whether the influence of a major Wall Street firm was powerful enough to prevent arbitrators who make decisions adverse to the industry from continuing to serve. "FINRA simply does not remove arbitrators from the roster based on their (rulings) and never has," Linda Fienberg, the head of FINRA's dispute resolution wrote in a letter on Wednesday to a national organization of lawyers who represent investors in securities arbitration cases. It is likely the first time FINRA has ever reinstated arbitrators.
Thanks for the article. Looks like they have already admitted that the arbitrators were fired due to this single case. Then they admitted that they normally fire arbitrators only "for reasons ranging from unprofessional conduct to mental impairment". If the arbitrators were so visibly stupid or one-sided, it should have been easy for Merrill to appeal the verdict; however they chose not to. Good that the court cases are continuing. Lets hope they force FINRA to disclose all communications, hopefully we find out whether Merrill influenced FINRA's decision in back-room dealings.