Select regulatory documents by category:
arbundo
ARBITRATION: RULE G-35
 |
Amendment Filed. The Board has filed an amendment to its Arbitration Code (rule G-35) to state that it will not accept any new arbitration claims filed on or after January 1, 1998, and that as of that date every bank dealer shall be subject to the NASD's Code of Arbitration Procedure. |
On May 22, 1997, the Board filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a proposed amendment to rule G-35, the Board's Arbitration Code. [1] The amendment creates two new sections: Section 37 states that the Board will not accept any new arbitration claims filed on or after January 1, 1998; and Section 38 provides that, as of January 1, 1998, every bank dealer (as defined in rule D-8) shall be subject to the Code of Arbitration Procedure of the NASD for every claim, dispute or controversy arising out of or in connection with the municipal securities activities of the bank dealer acting in its capacity as such. New Section 38 further provides that each bank dealer shall be subject to, and shall abide by, the NASD's Code of Arbitration Procedure as if the bank dealer were a "member" of the NASD.
The Board's arbitration program, which is limited to the resolution of disputes involving municipal securities, has been in effect since December 1978. The Board's caseload grew steadily for a time (for example, 21 cases were received in 1980; 82 in 1986; and 115 in 1988). Between 1978 and 1993, the NASD automatically transferred to the Board's arbitration program any claims received involving municipal securities, and until approximately 1993 the majority of the Board's cases were received in this manner. [2] In 1993, the NASD amended its arbitration code to require a customer's consent before it could transfer a case to another SRO. The practical effect of this amendment has been to virtually halt the transfer of municipal cases to the Board's arbitration program because customers choose to remain at the NASD. Consequently, the Board's caseload has declined dramatically from 115 cases received in 1988, to 10 cases received in 1996. For 1997, the Board has thus far received one case.
In September 1996, the Board published a notice expressing its concern over the costs of operating the arbitration program in light of the decreasing number of cases filed with the Board.[3] The Board stated that the decline in its caseload makes it difficult to justify the cost of continuing to operate the arbitration program, and that it was considering discontinuing its arbitration program. The Board requested comment on the impact that such action would have on the public and the industry, and specifically requested comment on what effect, if any, the elimination of its arbitration program would have on bank dealers who are not NASD members.
In response to its request, the Board received a comment letter from a dealer and from an individual who serves as an arbitrator for the Board. The dealer expressed its concern that arbitrators serving in other SRO arbitration programs do not have sufficient knowledge of the municipal securities industry. In an attempt to address this concern, the Board, in the next few months, plans to forward its list of arbitrators to the NASD.
With regard to bank dealers, the dealer stated that the Board's program should not be eliminated until an arbitration forum is established for these dealers, and suggested that the Board require bank dealers to use the NASD's arbitration program for resolving disputes involving municipal securities. The proposed rule change accomplishes this.
The other commentator expressed his belief that elimination of the Board's program will not impair the industry's arbitral process.
Accordingly, the Board has determined that, effective January 1, 1998, it will no longer accept any new claims filed with its arbitration program. The Board will, however, continue to operate its program in order to administer its current, open cases and any new claims received prior to January 1, 1998, but will discontinue its arbitration program when all such cases have been closed.
The Board notes that, currently, any customer or securities dealer with a claim, dispute or controversy against a dealer involving its municipal securities activities may submit that claim to the arbitration forum of any SRO of which the dealer is a member, including the NASD. Bank dealers, however, are unique in that they are subject to the Board's rules but are not members of any other SRO. In light of the Board's decision not to accept any new arbitration claims on or after January 1, 1998, it is necessary to amend rule G-35 to state this and to provide an alternative forum for claims involving the municipal securities activities of bank dealers. The proposed rule change accomplishes this by subjecting every bank dealer, as of January 1, 1998, to the NASD's Code of Arbitration Procedure for every claim, dispute or controversy arising out of or in connection with the municipal securities activities of the bank dealer acting in its capacity as such. In addition, the proposed rule change requires that bank dealers abide by the NASD's Code just as if they were "members" of the NASD for purposes of arbitration.
May 22, 1997
TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT (Language between *asterisks* is proposed new language : language between brackets is proposed deleted language)
Rule G-35. Arbitration Every broker, dealer and municipal securities dealer shall be subject to the Arbitration Code set forth herein.
Arbitration Code Section 1 though Section 36. No change. *Section 37. Arbitration Claims Filed On or After January 1, 1998. The Board will not accept any new arbitration claims filed on or after January 1, 1998.* *Section 38. Arbitration Involving Bank Dealers. As of January 1, 1998, every bank dealer (as defined in rule D-8) shall be subject to the Code of Arbitration Procedure of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. ("NASD") for every claim, dispute or controversy arising out of or in connection with the municipal securities activities of the bank dealer acting in its capacity as such. For purposes of this rule, each bank dealer shall be subject to, and shall abide by, the NASD's Code of Arbitration Procedure as if the bank dealer were a "member" of the NASD.*
ENDNOTES
[1] File No. SR-MSRB-97-4. Comments submitted to the SEC should refer to this file number.
[2] The NASD also transferred cases (other than those involving municipal securities) to other self-regulatory organizations (SROs), such as the New York Stock Exchange and the American Stock Exchange, if the particular claim arose out of a transaction in that SRO's market.
[3] MSRB Reports, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Sept. 1996) at 25.
 |
 |
Copyright 2000 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions of Use.
