National City Complaint - National City Broke Me Financially - Investments

Posted by madconsumer on 2011-01-20:

as with all banking institutions, the investment side is not regualted, just like any other investment company.

Posted by momsey on 2011-01-20:

Investment companies are absolutely regulated.

Jack Dock, I hope you reported your complaints to the SEC and/or FINRA.

Posted by Ponie on 2011-01-20:

Jack, I'm sorry to hear of the loss of your wife, along with your investments. However, Enron didn't go under in as little as a year or so ago. During this time, weren't you reading the statements you were getting from National City? Anytime I open up one of my statements and see anything just a bit awry, I'm on the phone to my adviser. Sometime things can be changed to my benefit, others not.

Also, I certainly hope you didn't have *everything* in Enron. All the advice we see on TV, read in the newspapers, magazines, financial periodicals, etc., tells us to diversify so all our $$$ are not in one basket.

All of us suffered in the down turn. None of us got relief from our investment losses by complaining. Even your broker at National City took a big hit.

Good luck!

Posted by momsey on 2011-01-20:

Ponie, that is true, but if you're paying a broker to handle your investments, he is responsible for handling them properly.

Posted by Ponie on 2011-01-20:

momsey, depends on the program you set up with the financial institution. In some cases you may be assigned a 'broker' who would be available to answer a question or two on the phone at no charge. This broker may look over your account perhaps once a year. In other instances, depending on fees the client pays, the broker may study your account once a quarter, once a month, or in the case of the high rollers (I don't fall into this category), once a week. Heck! In my office we had brokers who never placed some of their clients folders into the file cabinet.

Reading Jack's complaint, I tend to think he was in the first category I mentioned. Enron didn't go under in six months. During the time of their failing, the broker was probably calling/working with the individuals who were paying pre-determined fees and moving their money to the best advantage.

I was in the 'biz' for a while and always, always advise anyone who has money to invest, if it's as little as $5,000, to pay a bit of an upfront fee for a Registered Investment Advisor or Registered Representative. Check credentials. Is this person a CLU, CFP, ChFC, etc.? Unless you're a financial wizard--don't play around with your money, but don't let it set dormant, either. Dave Ramsey knows. :)

Posted by madconsumer on 2011-01-20:

momsey, i was not clear, i meant regualted like by fdic. if someone is loosing money in their investments, there is no one to blame but themselves.

Posted by momsey on 2011-01-20:

Ponie, I was also formerly in the biz. If the broker called him at all, that says to me that this was a broker who should have been keeping an eye in things. And you're right, no one should have all their eggs in one basket, but this is why people pay brokers - to guide them in the best way of investing their money. Unfortunately, a lot of laypeople don't even know the right questions to ask.

I completely disagree with madc that if an investor loses money, he has no one to blame but himself. The SEC and FINRA also disagree. Again, this is why people pay brokers.

Posted by trmn8r on 2011-01-20:

I don't consider my stock, which is the bulk of my investments, to be "savings". Savings is like CD's, money market accounts.

To me, a "stock broker" wouldn't call me if one of my stocks went down 30% to warn me to sell. If I were paying someone 1-5% per year to advise/manage my portfolio, then I would expect a call or action on my behalf if they had that responsibility.

Posted by singsing on 2011-01-20:

This broker failed and was only looking after HIS best interests. If he was a good broker, he would have advised this gentleman long ago not to have so much money in stocks. Shame on people who conduct their businesses this way. Sounds to me like the op was very ill informed by someone tring to get as big a commission as he could.

Posted by trmn8r on 2011-01-20:

singsing - We don't know what percentage of his assets were in Enron, and other stock. I suppose we could assume it was high, but we would really need the whole picture to make a judgment.

If his only concern were making commissions, the broker would be calling constantly and advising the OP to buy or sell something.

Posted by singsing on 2011-01-20:

Lord, it sounds like from what the op said about being broke, that was the case. I thnk that's a logical assumption.

Usually when something big happens in the stock market, the brokers start with their top clients--the one's with the most to lose, when they do their callbacks. This guy probably didn't rate.