Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter michaelson who wrote (10300)	8/19/2002 9:14:30 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 19428

Taglich Brothers, Inc. (CRD #29102, New York, New York) and Michael Nicholas Taglich (CRD #1343730, Registered Principal, Sag Harbor, New York) submitted an Offer of Settlement in which they were censured and fined $35,000, jointly and severally. In addition, the firm was fined an additional $5,000 and Taglich was required to requalify by exam as a general securities principal (Series 24) within 90 days of issuance of the Order Accepting the Offer of Settlement. If Taglich fails to requalify, he will be prohibited from serving in a principal capacity with any firm until he successfully requalifies. Without admitting or denying the allegations, the firm and Taglich consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that they failed to disclose to public customers that they had an arrangement whereby the firm's clearing firm would make markets in securities requested by the firm and then pay the firm a portion of the clearing firm's spread earned on some, but not all, trades executed by the clearing firm in these securities. The findings stated that the amount of the spreadwhich was not disclosed to customers on confirmations--would be split between the firm and the registered representative generating the trade who also received a regular commission. In addition, the firm failed to correct the confirmation slips to reflect the additional compensation, and the confirmations failed to state clearly whether the firm or the clearing firm was acting in a principal or agency capacity. NASD also found that the firm failed to detect and correct this ambiguity on confirmation slips for these trades. Moreover, NASD found that the firm failed to create and maintain order tickets that reflected the times the orders were received and executed. (NASD Case #CAF010028)