Item: Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP
Rating: 5
Author: M.B.

The Difference Between Solicited Trades & Unsolicited Trades

Investment trades that stockbrokers make on behalf of customers are either solicited trades or unsolicited trades. The main differences between solicited and unsolicited trades are:

Solicited trades are transactions recommended by the broker to a client.
Unsolicited trades are transactions the customer has suggested that a financial advisor make on their behalf.

Why is the Distinction Between Solicited Trades and Unsolicited Trades Important?

If the trade leads to significant investment losses, investors can more easily hold their broker and broker-dealer liable for a solicited trade.

For example, if you are a retail investor and your financial advisor recommended GPB Capital Holdings private placements — the alternative asset firm is now accused of operating a more than $1.8B Ponzi scam — these were solicited trades suggested by your registered representative. Over 17,000 investors have lost money in this scheme, and thousands have filed FINRA arbitration cases against their brokerage firms to recover damages.

However, if you are a retiree with a conservative risk tolerance level and you are the one who asked your broker to trade in oil and gas investments for you, these would be considered as unsolicited transactions. Even if you lost money when energy prices plunged during COVID-19, getting a FINRA arbitration panel to hold your financial advisor accountable could prove more challenging.

FINRA Rule 2010 and the Importance of Correctly Marking Trades

Under FINRA Rule 2010, Standards of Commerical Honor and Principles of Trade, registered representatives must correctly report and mark all transactions. This means accurately indicating whether a trade is a solicited or unsolicited transaction.

Noting the type of trade on the transaction ticket is essential, not solely for accurate recordkeeping but also in the event of a dispute arises between you and your broker regarding which kind of trade and/or the investment losses.

Unfortunately, financial advisors can incorrectly mark a transaction as unsolicited when, in fact, it was a solicited trade. There are also registered representatives who will purposely mismark a solicited trade as an unsolicited transaction to escape future liability. This can prove detrimental to an investor seeking to recover damages for unreasonable losses caused by the transaction.

FINRA’s 2018 Examination Findings Report notes that there are brokers who will mark trades that they made without a customer’s knowledge or permission as unsolicited transactions. Some financial advisors will incorrectly mark a trade made in a customer’s account as “unsolicited” because the transaction didn’t follow trading requirements or threshold limits.

If you noticed that your broker mismarked a solicited trade, you should notify the brokerage firm immediately.

Unsuitability and FINRA Rule 2111

Whether your broker solicited a trade or unsolicited at your request could make a difference in the outcome of your FINRA arbitration case, especially if the investment proved to be unsuitable for your investing profile or risk tolerance level. Under FINRA Rule 2111, brokers must make sure that any trade, investing strategy, or financial product they recommend is suitable for a customer, given their investing profile and risk tolerance level.

If a solicited trade by your financial advisor proved unsuitable for you and caused you significant losses. This increases your chances of either a FINRA arbitration panel granting you an award for damages or a broker-dealer negotiating a settlement to compensate you for your losses.

Experienced Broker Fraud Investment Lawyers

Regardless of whether your losses result from a solicited trade or an unsolicited trade, this is not the type of investor fraud case you want to pursue without experienced legal help.

Investment attorneys at Shepherd Smith Edwards and Kantas (SSEK Law Firm) represent retail investors, retirees, seniors, high-net-worth individual investors, ultra-high-net-worth individual investors, and institutional clients in their FINRA claims for broker fraud or negligence. We have recovered many millions of dollars for investors.

★★★★★

"I am going to miss conversations with you, Sam Edwards. You’ve been a wonderful lawyer and a friend. I loved learning legal jargon from you. But, even more, it is your self-respect and commitment to your position that I admire and your persistent patience-your equanimity. With great appreciation, thank you!" M.B.

"My experience with Ryan Cook has been very positive. Through every step of the litigation he explained what to expect to happen. When I spoke with him later he reviewed the process. He was very patient, and I never felt rushed. I have already told friends how wonderful he is." L.R.

"I want you to know that I very much appreciate your expertise, hard work, and guidance that led to a satisfactory resolution with Raymond James. From our first meeting, I felt "heard" and that my situation and story were respected. Every subsequent interaction I had with any of you - in person, via email, or by phone - only corroborated that feeling. What great work you do on behalf of people like me who have been wronged, yet don't know how to navigate the appeals/mediation/arbitration process as you do. I will be forever grateful." M.L.

"Good positive experience. Guided us through a difficult process and was pleased with the outcome. Everyone I dealt with was exceptional." A.G.

"Good intelligent attorneys who never miss a beat. I set my expectations high, and they delivered above and beyond. Do not miss the opportunity to let SSEK represent you. Top-notch, efficient and effective firm." S.M.

Submit a Law Firm Client Review