Lying to Brokers to open accounts

S

StockApprentice

I was just wondering how many of us lied to our brokers in order to open our trading accounts and or to receive enhanced account features. Any comments?

My personal thought on this is that some brokers seem to require a large amount of income, experience, etc. Experience is a requirement that I have the biggest qualm with. How is a guy supposed to get experience if he is unable to open a DECENT brokerage account with features that are actually useful.

It isn't so much of an issue now with the availability of many of the "new" features being added to even the smallest brokerage firms. I just wanted to find out if I wasn't the only one. :)
 
Lol :) Funny.

I guess the reason that I brought this up is because it seems stupid for Brokers to even ask the questions that they do. They really can't / don't verify the information anyway. Besides, it is in their best interest to allow whoever has money to trade so that they can make commissions...

Does the SEC require them (the broker) to ask most / some of the questions? If so, which ones?
 
they don't care that you lie. Just that your the one on the hook when things go awry. It'a all about them protecting their you know what.
 
Cdntrader's right. The brokers ask those questions because they've been sued in the past by novice traders who lost their butts and then sued the brokers claiming the broker should have protected them from themselves.

It's like the McDonald's thing - why was McDonald's held responsible for some dumb bimbo sticking a cup of hot coffee between her legs and driving down the road? The court decided McDonald's was supposed to know that could happen and didn't warn her that the coffee was hot (don't you just love lawyers?). That's also why they have to post warnings not to drink your shampoo, etc.

So the brokers ask about your experience before authorizing certain advanced trading or maybe even taking the account. That way, if you lie about being experienced and then make a bunch of novice mistakes and screw yourself up, you've got no recourse against them.
 
Originally posted by ArchAngel
It's like the McDonald's thing - why was McDonald's held responsible for some dumb bimbo sticking a cup of hot coffee between her legs and driving down the road? The court decided McDonald's was supposed to know that could happen and didn't warn her that the coffee was hot (don't you just love lawyers?).
More...
Watch it, that was my Grandma! Just kidding and I agree with your point about being held responsible for people doing stupid things but that lady was 79 yrs old and not the driver. You'd think that if you live that long you'd gain enough experience and wisdom to know that hot things can burn you.

Here's a writeup on that case. http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/tort/myths/articles.cfm?ID=785
 
Originally posted by ArchAngel
That's also why they have to post warnings not to drink your shampoo, etc.
More...

What you mean we're not supposed to drink shampoo?
Next you'll be saying we're not allowed to sleep with sheep.
Whats the world coming too
 
"Next you'll be saying we cant sleep w. the sheep=

You know what they say in Australia : Our sheep really know how to keep a secret :D

(Baaaaaaad joke)

Alex
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top