Vulnerable’ man sues bank over €3.4m investment loans
It’s sure to be a complicated case. Are there any regulations, either legal or specific to the financial trade, about mis-selling when businesses don’t make specifically fraudulent claims about products, but the client’s ability to make an informed judgement is in question?
Does a stockbroker have a vested interest in steering a client away from proper equities and into CFDs?
Does he get a higher commission? Or is it just that because of the leverage the client can “buy” more “shares” and this leads to increased commission for the broker?
Surely that would open up a massive tin of worms? What defines someone as having the ability to make informed judgments? [Insert standard banker joke here] If - as the article suggests - the guy has been told in writing that there’s high risk attached to what he’s doing, but he went ahead anyway, what more can be done? If he had been talked out of the investment and as a result lost out on millions because the risk was actually worth it, could he sue as well?
This obviously sounds like a very unfortunate case - one of far too many in the country - but surely at some stage we need to take responsibility for our own actions and stop looking to blame everyone else?
Or am I being too harsh in this instance?
He was well enough to take charge of some inherited properties, and eventually had a 10 million property portfolio to his name.
- Did he own a fancy car? Should he have been allowed to buy a fancy car? After all, the depreciation concept might have been difficult for him to fathom
Plenty of other people, less impaired than he, got greedy too. Either he was well enough to take charge of his financial affairs (evidently this wasn’t an issue for probate) or he wasn’t.
Next case …
This is a story about disability, not finance.
Having 2 strokes in childhood is not minor. Additionally not having any close relatives is very significant for someone in this situation.
This story is very different from other “investments gone bad” stories.
What are the chances that Davy were informed of these disabilities prior to them offering financial advice ?
I disagree that this is a story about disability rather than finance.
This is a story about someone losing money.
I expect this to go the same way as the guy with the reading age of a 7 year old… remember him!
I’d a look to see what 10,000 shares of Jury’s might have cost. (10,000 shares might be only 1000 euro depending on the company.) Seemingly around 18 euro a share back when every property mogul in the country was bidding for it.
So he probably went into a bank looking to buy around 150-200k worth of shares, so that would lead to special treatment.
If the guy has obvious mental problems, then Davy’s have reason to be concerned. I was also under the impression people were coming in demanding CFDs rather than been directed that way by the banks.
And if the investments had been successful? Should people with cognitive deficiencies be entitled to invest without downside risk? Or should they be simply excluded from making financial decisions and made ward of the court.
Pick one, because you can’t have it both ways. Allow otherwise functioning members of society to accrue assets, with all of the downside risk, or set a level beneath which these people live (financially) under the decision making of others.
If the cognitive impairment was of a sufficient degree, the assets of his mother should have been kept under trusteeship for him. Otherwise, he’s free to blow it on coke, hookers and contracts for difference. This is not the same thing as selling unemployment insurance to retired people.
I agree completely, but for whatever reason that didn’t happen and he had sizeable assets.
What’s before the courts now are allegations of “breach of contract, breach of duty, negligence, misrepresentation and conspiracy”.
Let’s await the verdict on that.
I don’t like it.
What’s to stop every pension fund holder suing their investment managers? “I know you said this was a medium risk product, but sure I don’t understand finance and risk, I’m just a factory worker. You had a duty to make sure I knew what I was investing in. All I have is this opaque glossary literature.”
Have heard anecdotally otherwise - though granted those who lost on CFD’s may have good reason to spread the blame elsewhere to spare their own blushes. Most from whom I have heard such stories were experienced business owners who should have known better.
If either party wasn’t compis mentis enough to enter the contracts, the contracts fall. So really this whole thing should be a matter for medical practitioners.
Whether it’s right or wrong in this particular case to strike down these contracts and liabilities, we can’t have the law standing over contracts where one of the parties isn’t capable of making informed decisions. That would make an ass of the first order of the law.
I’d have no issue with such a judgement, as long as his assets are immediately seized and he be made ward of the court. A board of trustees should then take charge of all his assets and either buy an annuity for him or manage his estate for any children he may have.
He can’t have his cake and eat it. There’s enough people still playing monopoly in this country.
‘Very vulnerable’ man awarded €2m against Davy - Mary Carolan → irishtimes.com/news/crime-an … -1.1755692