Director banned for use of FX trading robot
A Gold Coast director who leased an automated foreign exchange (FX) trading robot has been banned from providing financial services for four years.
Gregory William Finerty was the sole director of Bradford AI and was banned after the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) discovered he carried on a financial services business without an Australian financial services (AFS) licence and engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct.
Bradford AI leased an algorithmic trading program known as ‘Robot 1’ to trade on the FX market, using an Australia-based over the counter contracts for difference (CFD) broker.
Between about January 2020 to at least the end of December 2021, Finerty dealt in financial products without a licence by arranging for his clients to acquire and dispose of financial products, being foreign currency CFDs.
This was despite an ASIC product intervention order which imposed conditions on the issue and distribution of CFDs to retail clients.
Finerty also engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct when he mislead clients about the performance of Robot 1 and directed or assisted clients to mislead the CFD broker about their trading experience.
He was banned from controlling, whether alone or with others, an entity that carries on a financial services business and performing any function involved in carrying on a financial services business.
In banning Finerty, ASIC also found that he is not a fit and proper person to provide financial services, is not adequately trained or competent to provide financial services, and is likely to contravene financial services law.
Finerty had the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of ASIC’s decision and the banning was recorded on ASIC’s banned and disqualified register
AUTHOR
Laura Dew
Recommended for you
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
New Zealand’s financial regulator is following the footsteps of its Tasman neighbours and proposing to conduct a review on improving the accessibility of financial advice and advice business models.
Why isn't he in jail, and what was his fine. It is these type of practices that continue to cause problems for the industry...
Why only ban for 4 years? Why not for life? That's someone who clearly has no regard for anyone but themselves and should never be allowed to provide a financial service.
ASIC ban a peoson from doing what he was already not alowed to do. No punishment, no fine. Why are we paying for them to do this? If an adviser did this we would have our lives ruined. You are way way way better off no being licensed as you dont have all the costs, education, compliance and ongoing training requirements imposed on advisers and there is no penalty when you get caught.
Why are we paying for them to do this?
I believe the answer is in your question - they are getting paid and paid very well I believe - unless your Shipton and had to pay some back?
Please could you provide the penalties lodged against the directors of CWS financial services after the financial service license had been cancelled by ASIC?
The licence cancellation took effect on 26 June 2019.
Thank you.
William Boeder. legal advocate.
Also please explain how it is fair and reasonable that licensed financial advisers fund this necessary policing activity.
On this basis we should fund murder investigations and hit and run and medicare fraud too. AAARRRGHHH!!!!!