IN THE MATTER OF Alain Béland - Set Date

MONTREAL, May 18 /CNW/ - Notice is hereby given that a hearing will be held before a Hearing Panel of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada ("IIROC") on Tuesday June 1, 2010, at 2:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, at 5 Place Ville-Marie, Suite 1550, Montréal, in the matter of Alain Béland (the Respondent).

The proposed hearing concerns matters for which the Respondent may be disciplined as a Regulated Person of IIROC, pursuant to Part 10 of IIROC Dealer Member Rule 20.

The hearing relates to allegations that:

    
    (a) Between May and November 2004, the Respondent engaged in conduct
        unbecoming and detrimental to the public interest and failed to
        observe high standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with
        respect to Standard C of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which
        relates to professionalism, and failed in his duty to protect the
        public, contrary to By-Law 29.1 of the IDA, when he facilitated the
        purchase, off book, of shares in a public company, A, by his client
        B, who was also his spouse, directly from insiders, without first
        informing the firm of the projected trade;

    (b) Between 2004 and 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming
        and detrimental to the public interest and failed to observe high
        standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to
        Standard A of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relates to
        the Duty of Care, and failed in his duty to protect the public,
        contrary to Regulation 1300.1(a) and to By-Law 29.1 of the IDA, when
        he failed to know his client C, to update the customer file, and to
        determine whether this client was an insider of public companies,
        whereas this client was in fact an insider with respect to numerous
        securities of such companies, in which the Respondent had traded or
        recommended trades;

    (c) Between 2004 and 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming
        and detrimental to the public interest and failed to observe high
        standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to
        Standard A of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relates to
        the Duty of Care (know your client, reasonable diligence), when he
        failed to ensure that investment recommendations made with regard to
        three of his clients, D, E and F, were in keeping with their
        investment goals and their risk tolerance, contrary to IDA By-Law
        29.1 and to Regulation 1300.1(a) and 1300.1(p);

    (d) Between 2004 and 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming
        and detrimental to the public interest and failed to observe high
        standards of ethics and conduct, contrary to IDA By-Law 29.1,
        relative to the merit and relevance of investment recommendations
        made with respect to the securities of A and G, considering that the
        Respondent, his spouse, and representatives on the team, H and I,
        held these securities in personal accounts, had purchased them
        through the Respondent, who maintained privileged ties with insiders
        of these companies who were also clients of the team, and that as at
        December 31, 2005, 248 of the team's accounts held approximately
        18.5% of the outstanding shares in A and 128 accounts held
        approximately 1.5% of the outstanding shares in G;

    (e) In April 2005, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming and
        detrimental to the public interest and failed to observe high
        standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to
        Standard C of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relates to
        professionalism, contrary to IDA By-Law 29.1, when he participated in
        a private placement in public company J for his own account, without
        prior disclosure of the projected trade to the firm;

    (f) In April 2005, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming and
        detrimental to the public interest and failed in his duty to protect
        the public, contrary to By-Law 29.1 of the Association, when he
        orchestrated the participation of I in an over-the-counter investment
        in the security of J, without prior disclosure of the projected trade
        to the firm;

    (g) In April 2005, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming and
        detrimental to the public interest and failed in his duty to protect
        the public, when he falsely declared that the assignment of shares in
        J in favour of I had been effected at no charge, whereas in reality
        it was executed for a consideration of $6,000, contrary to IDA By-Law
        29.1;

    (h) Between November 2005 and January 2006, the Respondent engaged in
        conduct unbecoming and contrary to the public interest and failed in
        his duty to protect the public, contrary to IDA By-Law 29.1, when he
        permitted a client, E, to make an over-the-counter investment in the
        security of A through its president, K, in the context of an exchange
        effected in her RRSP account, without first disclosing the projected
        trade to the firm;

    (i) On or about January 9, 2006, and in the context of an exchange
        effected in the RRSP account of his client E, the Respondent engaged
        in conduct unbecoming and detrimental to the public interest and
        failed to observe high standards of ethics and conduct, particularly
        with respect to Standard B of the Conduct and Practices Handbook,
        which relates to Trustworthiness, Honesty and Fairness, contrary to
        IDA By-Law 29.1, when he used the workstation of an employee of L and
        appropriated her identity to send an e-mail addressed to his client
        E, asking her to authorize L to send the president of A, K, a payment
        of $38,000 for the shares already deposited in her RRSP account;

    (j) Between January and March 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct
        unbecoming and contrary to the public interest, contrary to IDA By-
        Law 29.1, when he failed in his duty to protect the public in the
        matter of numerous trades effected in the securities of M and N by
        client C, who proved to be a consultant to these companies, when he
        knew or should have known that the trades were or could be an
        indication of market manipulation;

    (k) In April 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming and
        contrary to the public interest and failed to observe high standards
        of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to Standards B and C
        of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relate to
        professionalism and to the rules stipulated in the Handbook relative
        to the examination of complaints from the three clients O, contrary
        to IDA By-Law 29.1, when he orchestrated with another representative
        on his team, H, the settlement of the complaints of these three
        clients, by compensating them, the whole without the knowledge of the
        firm;

    (l) On or about April 10, 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct
        unbecoming and contrary to the public interest and failed to observe
        high standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to
        Standard C of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relates to
        professionalism, contrary to IDA By-Law 29.1, when he purchased
        securities of a public company, G, directly from a client, a
        management company owned by an insider of this public company, P,
        without first notifying the firm of the projected trade;

    (m) In August 2006, the Respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming and
        detrimental to the public interest and failed to observe high
        standards of ethics and conduct, particularly with respect to
        Standard C of the Conduct and Practices Handbook, which relates to
        professionalism, contrary to IDA By-Law 29.1, when he participated in
        a private placement in public company Q for his own account, without
        prior disclosure of the projected trade to the firm;
    

The IDA formally initiated the investigation into the Respondent's conduct on November 10, 2006. The violations are alleged to have occurred while the Respondent was a Registered Representative with the Brossard Branch of Desjardins Securities Inc. The Respondent is no longer a registrant with an IIROC-regulated firm.

The hearing is open to the public, unless the Hearing Panel orders otherwise.

IIROC is the national self-regulatory organization which oversees all investment dealers and trading activity on debt and equity marketplaces in Canada. Created in 2008 through the consolidation of the Investment Dealers Association of Canada and Market Regulation Services Inc., IIROC sets high quality regulatory and investment industry standards, protects investors and strengthens market integrity while maintaining efficient and competitive capital markets.

IIROC carries out its regulatory responsibilities through setting and enforcing rules regarding the proficiency, business and financial conduct of dealer firms and their registered employees and through setting and enforcing market integrity rules regarding trading activity on Canadian equity marketplaces.

For further information: Claudyne Bienvenu, Regional Director, Regulation, [phone], [email protected]; Jeff Kehoe, Acting Vice President, Enforcement, [phone], [email protected]