Would you do business with or through Davy Stockbrokers

Are Davy Stockbrokers just pure filth or have they redeeming qualities?
Make a case for them.
Who would do business with them based on experiences like these.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0302/1200374-central-bank-fines-davy/

This was all happening at the time that this was trundling through the courts.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/stockbroker-gambled-with-orphans-5m-fortune-30173016.html

Cute Hoor

The saving grace for them is probably that it was 7 years ago, wouldn't be rushing headlong in to them this afternoon though

They were doing this just after getting rapped on the knuckles for destroying the trust fund of a young man who was orphaned at a young age.

Jim2007

Deleted User wrote: »

Are Davy Stockbrokers just pure filth or have they redeeming qualities?
Make a case for them.
Who would do business with them based on experiences like these.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0302/1200374-central-bank-fines-davy/

This was all happening at the time that this was trundling through the courts.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/stockbroker-gambled-with-orphans-5m-fortune-30173016.html

Well first of all these are very specific events and very unlikely to fall within then the range of transactions undertaken by people on this forum, they are most likely to be influenced by price rather that ethics!

After all they have no qualms about:
- Their brokers auctioning their trade to the highest bidder
- Lending out their positions
- Buying fractions of shares they don't actually own
and so on

That said you don't seem to be a regularly post here and are clearly not considering doing business with them, so what is your beef? Just a disgruntled individual wanting to stir it up or what????

Jim2007

Jim2007 wrote: »

Well first of all these are very specific events and very unlikely to fall within then the range of transactions undertaken by people on this forum, they are most likely to be influenced by price rather that ethics!

After all they have no qualms about:
- Their brokers auctioning their trade to the highest bidder
- Lending out their positions
- Buying fractions of shares they don't actually own
and so on

That said you don't seem to be a regularly post here and are clearly not considering doing business with them, so what is your beef? Just a disgruntled individual wanting to stir it up or what????

You are right in that I don't post here often. I hold a lot of shares in a few boring(blue chip type) companies, adding a few thousand euro each month as I go, rarely sell.

I have no dealings with Davy but they just seem like one of those rentseekers aligned to the Establishment in Ireland who appear to not be held properly accountable
for their actions and those two reports are just ones which came to light.

brucky

Will they still be the state media’s got to people for investment tips? Are the people involved still in the company, or have they been promoted to operate in other financial institutions?

dubrov

brucky wrote: »

Will they still be the state media’s got to people for investment tips? Are the people involved still in the company, or have they been promoted to operate in other financial institutions?

Does it matter? Those sort of practices tend to be endemic in a company and come from the top down.

The J Stands for Jay

Any time I've checked, they've always been quite expensive for execution only services. I also recall them selling entirely unsuitable investments to Credit Unions a number of years ago. They either don't know their stuff, or they don't care. Which seems similar to yesterday's story. I haven't read about the orphan yet

Jim2007

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no dealings with Davy but they just seem like one of those rentseekers aligned to the Establishment in Ireland who appear to not be held properly accountable
for their actions and those two reports are just ones which came to light.

In other words another hair-brained consistory theory!

There will always be crooks and scammers in every business, it's an accepted fact. It's why we put all the those checks and balances into the system, regulate it and supervise it. And revise the approach when it is found wanting.

You should take comfort from the fact that most of these incidents occur outside the normal business of brokerages - this is largely due to the fact that at this stage the main business is strongly supervised.

That is not to say that it could not happen again or at another brokerage.

But for the nature of the transactions people here seem to execute, I don't believe it will make much difference.

Jim2007

brucky wrote: »

Will they still be the state media’s got to people for investment tips? Are the people involved still in the company, or have they been promoted to operate in other financial institutions?

Please tell me you are not taking that stuff seriously....

Jim2007

Jim2007 wrote: »

In other words another hair-brained consistory theory!

consistory??? I didn't mention the church or freemasons.
I'm trying to understand your viewpoint. Which financial institution did you work in before decamping to Switzerland?

dubrov

Jim2007 wrote:

There will always be crooks and scammers in every business, it's an accepted fact. It's why we put all the those checks and balances into the system, regulate it and supervise it. And revise the approach when it is found wanting.

This wasn't just one rogue employee. There were loads of them involved

Jim2007

Deleted User wrote: »

consistory??? I didn't mention the church or freemasons.
I'm trying to understand your viewpoint. Which financial institution did you work in before decamping to Switzerland?

None, but I have worked in the area of fraud and insolvency investigation in Ireland in the past, if that makes any difference for you.

Jim2007

dubrov wrote: »

This wasn't just one rogue employee. There were loads of them involved

Yes and of course having 16 people conspire to defraud someone is concerning, but it did not happen in general business of the brokerage that people here are concerned about.


If you wish to have a broker that was not at sometime found to be in breach of the rules or acted in an unethical way, then you are probably going to be severely challenged.


I'm not in anyway seeking to condone these people's actions. I'm just saying for most people on here it is not a concern.

Craig_David

Jim2007 wrote: »

That said you don't seem to be a regularly post here and are clearly not considering doing business with them, so what is your beef? Just a disgruntled individual wanting to stir it up or what????

What a very weird response.

Sorry for dwelling on this but it appears you are happy to say unkind things about the people who normally frequent the forum but share no view on the morality or lack thereof in Davy Stockbrokers. Your contribution is curious in that we know that various financial organisations played "ducks and drakes" with the regulations imposed by the Central Bank in the past but you appear to have a steadfast belief in the regulatory framework that governs companies such as the Banks and the Stockbrokers operating in Dublin.

garrettod

Jim2007 wrote: »

... I'm just saying for most people on here it is not a concern.

Perhaps the question at the beginning of this thread needs to be considered from an ethical and moral perspective - rather than from a potential risk perspective?

I think you are wrong to be making the assumption that most people here won't be concerned, Jim.

Firstly, ethics, and how professionals conduct themselves, are more important issues for investors now, that they might have been 20-30-40 years ago.

Secondly, while a lot of people on this site might appear to be involved in smaller vanilla type transactions, none of us really have a clue what the financial circumstances are, for the overall community that read these threads, so there may actually be quite a lot of people who are dealing with Davys, for more than just execution only services.

---

For what it's worth, I've never been a fan of Davys, and always sought to deal with their competitors.

While they aren't the only ones to draw negative press, from time to time, they seem to feature more regularly than most of their competitors, IMHO.

Add to that, the fact that I sense a degree of arrogance from Davys, which I don't get from Goodbody, or Cantor Fitz.

Craig_David

garrettod wrote: »

Perhaps the question at the beginning of this thread needs to be considered from an ethical and moral perspective - rather than from a potential risk perspective?

I think you are wrong to be making the assumption that most people here won't be concerned, Jim.

Firstly, ethics, and how professionals conduct themselves, are more important issues for investors now, that they might have been 20-30-40 years ago.

Secondly, while a lot of people on this site might appear to be involved in smaller vanilla type transactions, none of us really have a clue what the financial circumstances are, for the overall community that read these threads, so there may actually be quite a lot of people who are dealing with Davys, for more than just execution only services.

---

For what it's worth, I've never been a fan of Davys, and always sought to deal with their competitors.

While they aren't the only ones to draw negative press, from time to time, they seem to feature more regularly that most of their competitors, IMHO.

Add to that, the fact that I sense a degree of arrogance from them, which I don't get from Goodbody, or Cantor Fitz, to give two examples.

Some great points. Such arrogance in the letter to staff that they failed to acknowledge a conflict of interest. Says so much about the people running the show.
I'm wondering also how this situation which Jim referred to as very specific and unlikely to effect many of the posters on this forum, would be any different to a retail client of Davy's phoning up looking for a price to offload an equity position. The dealer at the time also in the knowledge of an employee looking to buy, offering the client a price below best execution, to the benefit of the employee.
I'm very surprised the employees can have trading accounts with the firm period.

tdf7187

Deleted User wrote: »

You are right in that I don't post here often. I hold a lot of shares in a few boring(blue chip type) companies, adding a few thousand euro each month as I go, rarely sell.

I have no dealings with Davy but they just seem like one of those rentseekers aligned to the Establishment in Ireland who appear to not be held properly accountable
for their actions and those two reports are just ones which came to light.

Davys are part of the Golden Circle. This is the tip of the iceberg. While the Central Bank's action is welcome, I've reported Davys regarding matters unconnected to the recent disclosure but nothing has been done.

JPup

Jim2007 wrote: »

Yes and of course having 16 people conspire to defraud someone is concerning, but it did not happen in general business of the brokerage that people here are concerned about.


If you wish to have a broker that was not at sometime found to be in breach of the rules or acted in an unethical way, then you are probably going to be severely challenged.


I'm not in anyway seeking to condone these people's actions. I'm just saying for most people on here it is not a concern.

The 16 included the current and former CEO, at least one other board member and several other senior partners at the firm. Collectively they own a big chunk of the company’s shares. You can’t just brush this under the carpet.

garrettod

JPup wrote: »

... Collectively they own a big chunk of the company’s shares. You can’t just brush this under the carpet.

Can't you ?

It looks to be like they are trying, and the Central Bank think that they are great fellas, having issued a fine.

HansKroenke

garrettod wrote: »

Can't you ?

It looks to be like they are trying, and the Central Bank think that they are great fellas, having issued a fine.

The Currency won't let the Davy story die.

Naming some of the individuals involved as well as their current and past roles at Davy as well as outlining the events around the transaction;

https://thecurrency.news/articles/38563/driven-by-money-how-the-davy-16-was-assembled-and-how-the-anglo-bonds-deal-was-pulled-off/

https://thecurrency.news/articles/38369/davy-boss-mckiernan-personally-benefited-from-anglo-bond-deal-and-he-was-also-part-of-the-davy-committee-that-sanctioned-it/

https://thecurrency.news/articles/38438/between-fines-settlements-and-legal-bills-the-true-cost-to-davy-of-anglo-bond-scandal-is-e15m/

It's shocking to be honest that those involved hold senior roles still at the firm but the lack of individual reprimands by the Bank makes it look like a paper tiger. There is a storm brewing in politics and among its clients so this situation is far from resolved.

garrettod

Hi,

I hope you are right - as we really need to show that we've become tough on white collar crime, and that ethics actually mean something in this county etc.

As a brief aside, who is behind The Currency? I've seen their emails and they are quite good, but haven't gone researching them.

neris

Tom Lyons & Ian Kehoe. Good business journalists who follow a story and aren't afraid of upsetting anyone which is what i think they did to a certain ex radio station owner. Sam Smyth is involved with them to

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/can-davy-s-clients-stay-silent-as-board-goes-into-conclave-1.4502478

Irish Times report.
If I were a client of them I'd be worried. If you can't trust your own agent then you need a new agent.

dubrov

I can't understand why there are no criminal charges for the Davy personnel involved in the deal

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0306/1201364-davy-stockbrokers/

3 resign. If there were 16 of them were they not all equally culpable.

Cute Hoor

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0306/1201364-davy-stockbrokers/

3 resign. If there were 16 of them were they not all equally culpable.

2 had certainly gone already

Islander13

I'm sure the others will go too. Probably not senior enough to be commented on publicly

Islander13

Sure probably too strong, should go

JustAThought

I thinks its shocking that they took 5 milion in property off a profoundly intellectually disabled child who was an orphan and put him 30m IN dEBT and then tried to cover their actions with a fraudelent paper trail.

Thats shocking.

Whatever about the ‘other’ 16 & the corruption.

Also, How did they manage to make a private donation to Bertie Aherns bank account - I thought his defense as minister for finance was that he didn’t have one? ( I can’t remember if this was before or after he made his girlfriend a senator).

Who appoints ‘experts’ to the central bank and to financial ombudsman positions and puts them in charge of regulatory boards again?

garrettod

Those three have only gone now, because the story hit the headlines.

There were 16 people involved in this deal, which should be described as unethical, at the very least. That's 16 people who should be individually held to account.

It seems that Davy paid the legal fees, and is now to pay the fine. That's the company, not the individuals, being held accountable. The job is ont half done!

dubrov

garrettod wrote:

Those three have only gone now, because the story hit the headlines.

I believe they are all major shareholders. I'd say they decided to go to try and protect the value of the company

garrettod

dubrov wrote: »

I believe they are all major shareholders. I'd say they decided to go to try and protect the value of the company

Which is in their financial interest!

JustAThought

garrettod wrote: »

Which is in their financial interest!

Things escalating badly over the weekend in Davys I see

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/davy-group-of-16-face-possibility-of-personal-sanction-from-central-bank-1.4503774?mode=amp

And in all the talk of stomping out corruption the e400 million in bonds bought by staff against ll policies and regulations apeaks volumes. This is the crowd that trades NAMA stock on behalf of the texpayer.

TXPTGR1

JustAThought wrote: »

I thinks its shocking that they took 5 milion in property off a profoundly intellectually disabled child who was an orphan and put him 30m IN dEBT and then tried to cover their actions with a fraudelent paper trail.

Thats shocking.

Whatever about the ‘other’ 16 & the corruption.

Also, How did they manage to make a private donation to Bertie Aherns bank account - I thought his defense as minister for finance was that he didn’t have one? ( I can’t remember if this was before or after he made his girlfriend a senator).

Who appoints ‘experts’ to the central bank and to financial ombudsman positions and puts them in charge of regulatory boards again?

Have you a link to the story about the child and the trust fund hadn’t heard that one

Calahonda52

dubrov wrote: »

I can't understand why there are no criminal charges for the Davy personnel involved in the deal

It seems that the current rules are that the CB needs to find the company off side first, and then it can go after the individuals with whatever tools it has.

On What basis do you want to bring criminal charges?

Calahonda52

HansKroenke wrote: »

.. There is a storm brewing in politics and among its clients so this situation is far from resolved.

The politics piece will blow out with no changes, the acid test is their role with the NTMA: they make millions per bond issue.
Some clients may leave

I've mailed Pascal asking him to cease sending business to Davy. If enough people do then they might actually learn what being held accountable for your actions feels like.

Mongfinder General

Calahonda52 wrote: »

It seems that the current rules are that the CB needs to find the company off side first, and then it can go after the individuals with whatever tools it has.

On What basis do you want to bring criminal charges?

My guess is that some of these guys might settle with the Central Bank - who as afaik cannot impose a custodial sentence. They can fine and ban individuals. I might be wrong on this.
Is this going to be enough to satisfy an increasingly pissed off public?

thomasm

TXPTGR1 wrote: »

Have you a link to the story about the child and the trust fund hadn’t heard that one

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2014/0409/607880-davy-client-court/

Calahonda52

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0308/1201621-ntma-bond-auction/

This is a serious loss

dubrov

dubrov wrote: »

I can't understand why there are no criminal charges for the Davy personnel involved in the deal

What would they be sentenced to?

Under what charge would they be arrested & held?

Shedite27

Deleted User wrote: »

What would they be sentenced to?

Under what charge would they be arrested & held?

I'm not a legal person but MiFiD (Markets in Financial Instruments Act 2018) carries a jail term of up to 10 years for any of the following. A good legal team could make an argument that Davy breached ALL of these

• failing to comply with requirements imposed on a person or firm by an Authorised Officer who has been appointed by the Central Bank;
  
• failure by a person to make certain notifications to the Central Bank before making a relevant acquisition or disposal in an investment firm or of the investment firm to notify the Central Bank it if becomes aware of any acquisition or disposal of holdings in its capital that would cause it to exceed or fall below the thresholds set out in Regulation 19(2) of the MiFID Regulations);
  
• failure by an investment firm to make adequate arrangements to safeguard clients' ownership rights, when holding financial instruments belonging to clients;
  
• failure by an investment firm to comply with the conditions and requirements of its authorisation;
  
• failure by an investment firm to take all appropriate steps to identify and prevent or manage conflicts of interest that arise in the course of providing investment services or ancillary services (or a combination of both);
  
• failure by an investment firm to act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the best interests of its clients and to comply with the principles set out in Regulation 32 ("General Principles and information to clients") or Regulation 33 ("Assessment of suitability and appropriateness and reporting to clients") of the MiFID Regulations; and
  
• failure by an investment firm to execute orders on terms most favourable to a client.

Calahonda52

Re failure by an investment firm to execute orders on terms most favourable to a client.
this looks promising

HansKroenke

Going to go up for sale now, likely to be broken up into component parts too. Apparently valued at 350-400 million last week before this announcement but expected to be available at a steep discount now.

https://thecurrency.news/articles/39376/davy-to-be-put-up-for-sale-as-anglo-bond-scandal-escalates/
https://www.reuters.com/article/davy-ireland/update-1-bank-of-ireland-explores-approach-for-davy-stockbrokers-reports-idUSL1N2L8125

Chuckie_Egg

BOI could pick it up on the cheap now, it would be a good move for them and the market would like it as the battle for wealth management with AIB steps up a gear.

Calahonda52

Shotgun wedding

brucky

Jim2007 wrote: »

Please tell me you are not taking that stuff seriously....

Yes it appears that others might be as well

brucky

Greencore, a man with a learning disability, this is the second time the Deputy CEO has resigned over City Core. The man with no bank account and potential future President of Ireland heaped praise on them. What’s palpable is the silence and lack of condemnation from the finance sector in Ireland after the previous crash 4 million is pocket change to Davy.

peterofthebr

Im thinking about opening a Davy account actually...

Maybe this is wrong board but anyone know

If I deposit say 100k into Davy.. Or more.

Let's say (ignoring the stock market risks) Invest 80k into stocks and have 20k in cash. If Davy filed for bankruptcy I understand stocks are 'recorded' in euroclear and am recorded as holding those stocks(so I'm covered there)? , and Davy would only be covered by cental bank for 80k cash per individuals?so another example if I had 200k in cash in Davy and they went bankrupt I'd only get back 80 thousand, there must be ecb rules about this.. I just can't find it.

Anyone know where I can see this information on paper its a bit vague. Thanks