开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)|3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

404 not found · 2024年07月05日

如果她不在建议里面做完整的陈述,是否会导致违反fair dealing

NO.PZ2024022002000178

问题如下:

Tania Watt, CFA, disseminates recommendations to purchase specific bonds to her clientele, without extensive elaboration. She informs them that they can request more details. Subsequently, a sudden rise in interest rates leads to a decline in the value of these bonds, causing substantial losses for her clients. Is Watt likely in violation of ethical standards for her actions?

选项:

A.No, she is not in violation. B.Yes, due to the substantial losses incurred by her clients following her recommendations. C.Yes, for providing incomplete information in her initial bond recommendations.

解释:

Option A is correct. As per Standard V(B), Communication with Clients and Prospective Clients, Watt fulfilled her duty by alerting clients that additional information was accessible upon request. She is not liable for the unpredicted market changes that happened after her advice was given. The decline in bond prices due to external factors such as interest rate fluctuations does not constitute a violation on her part.

如果她不在建议里面做完整的陈述,而是告知客户需要详细信息联系她,那么必然造成她和客户沟通存在先后顺序的差异,早联系的客户就更早的拥有交易的判断信息优势,这是否会导致违反fair dealing?

1 个答案
已采纳答案

王暄_品职助教 · 2024年07月07日

在评估Tania Watt的行为是否违反公平交易原则时,我们需要考虑她是否在所有客户之间公平地提供了信息,并且没有给予某些客户优先于其他客户的优势。


根据已知,Watt告知了她的客户群关于购买特定债券的建议,并且指出他们可以请求更多细节。这种做法本身并不违反公平交易,因为她向所有客户提供了相同的信息,并且明确表示了额外信息的可获得性。

关于你提到的“沟通存在先后顺序的差异”,这确实可能导致某些客户比其他客户更早地获得详细信息,但这并不直接等同于违反公平交易。关键在于Watt是否故意或系统地给予某些客户优先权,或者是否故意延迟向其他客户提供信息。如果没有这样的证据,那么仅仅因为客户联系的先后顺序不同而导致的信息获取差异,并不构成违反公平交易。

因此,除非有证据表明Watt故意或歧视性地对待不同客户,否则她的行为并不违反公平交易原则。她已经履行了告知客户可以获取更多信息的责任,并且市场变化导致的损失不应归咎于她。所以,在这个特定情况下,我们不会认为她违反了公平交易。

  • 1

    回答
  • 0

    关注
  • 125

    浏览
相关问题