The Suitability File That Doesn't Add Up
A registered representative at a mid-sized dealer has recommended a leveraged ETF strategy to a 71-year-old client whose account file lists annual income of $38,000 (mostly pension and CPP), investable assets of $210,000, and a stated objective of 'income with capital preservation.' The client signed a new account application 14 months ago. The rep's notes describe the client as 'sophisticated, wants growth.' Over the last six months the account has traded 41 times, generating $9,400 in commissions against a portfolio that has fallen from $210,000 to $176,000. The client called the branch to complain that he 'didn't know the account could lose money.' The rep's supervisor reviewed and approved each trade but documented only 'reviewed - suitable.' The branch manager asks the Chief Compliance Officer whether this is a supervisory failure, a suitability failure, or both, and what must happen before the next business day.
1. How should the CCO characterize the failures here, and what is the correct sequence of escalation and remediation steps?
Read the worked answer
Both failures are present and they compound. The suitability failure sits with the rep: the KYC data (income, assets, stated objective) is internally inconsistent with a leveraged growth strategy, and the rep's note asserting 'sophisticated, wants growth' contradicts the signed application without any documented update to the KYC record. Under CIRO's know-your-client and suitability obligations, the dealer must have a reasonable basis for the recommendation, and where the client's circumstances change or the rep's characterization diverges from the file, the KYC must be updated and documented - not overwritten in a note.
The supervisory failure sits with the supervisor and, by extension, the dealer. Approving 41 trades with the annotation 'reviewed - suitable' is not supervision; it is a rubber stamp. Supervision requires evidence of actual assessment against the client's profile, particularly for a senior client with modest means and a conservative objective. The pattern of trading relative to portfolio performance ($9,400 in commissions while the account lost $176,000 minus $210,000, i.e., $34,000) also raises a churning/excessive trading concern that supervision should have caught.
Sequence: (1) Immediately restrict the rep's activity on this account and preserve all records - notes, trade blotters, call recordings, emails. (2) Notify the branch manager and the dealer's designated compliance officer in writing. (3) Contact the client to acknowledge the complaint and explain the complaint-handling process and timelines. (4) Open a formal investigation file with a documented scope. (5) Assess whether the conduct triggers a reportable event to CIRO. Do not remediate the client financially before the investigation establishes the facts, but do not delay client contact either.
2. The supervisor argues the rep is solely responsible because 'the rep is the one who knows the client.' How should the CCO respond, and what supervisory design change should follow?
Read the worked answer
The CCO should reject the premise. Supervision is not a backstop that activates only when the rep is dishonest; it is an independent control. The supervisor had the same KYC data in front of them and approved trades that any reasonable review would flag. Delegation of client contact to the rep does not delegate the dealer's supervisory obligation.
Design changes to consider: (1) Risk-based trade review - flag accounts where trade frequency, commission-to-assets ratio, or product risk exceeds thresholds relative to the client's stated objective and age. (2) Require documented rationale, not a checkbox, when approving trades in leveraged or complex products for clients over a certain age or below an asset threshold. (3) Segregate the approval function so a supervisor cannot approve trades in an account where they have a compensation or reporting relationship with the rep without secondary review. (4) Add periodic KYC refresh triggers and require a signed client update when the rep's characterization diverges from the file. (5) Test the control: sample approvals quarterly and measure whether the rationale field contains substantive content. A control that cannot fail a test is not a control.