In theory, if you have lost money because your broker (or any financial institution) gave you bad advice, mismanaged your investments, misled you in any way or did various other unlawful and ethical things, you can sue for damages. If these breaches of duty are provable, the "merits of the case" are strong, as a lawyer would say. Unfortunately, these merits may not be enough to get you fair compensation with a fair amount of financial outlay. No matter how good the case, the road to financial damages is a rocky one.

The Theory and the Reality
In an ideal world, if you have a good case, you or your lawyer would write to the broker explaining the situation and requesting that he or she pay a certain amount of compensation or make a fair offer. The broker would face the realities of the situation and act with integrity, offering you a reasonable sum. If he or she genuinely believed you were mistaken, he or she would explain why, backing this up with the appropriate financial and/or legal evidence.

Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and nothing makes a broker's blood run cold (or perhaps hot) more than a damages claim. The amount of money involved is generally not trivial and there is often a fear of "the floodgates opening," as you are probably not the only client in this position. It is also human nature that people are reluctant to admit they are in the wrong, no more so when this affects their pocket. Last, but very definitely not least, the civil law system has some intrinsic flaws that can be exploited by the unscrupulous and/or desperate.

So What Actually Happens?
In many or most cases, the broker will deny absolutely everything with arguments that will make your own blood either boil or freeze. The defenses will range from blaming you, the market or both, to distorting the figures or the laws, the logic or anything else that shifts the liability for the losses away from the broker. This first response will generally be presented as one of injured innocence.

If you push further, it will get nasty. Despite legal and ethical obligations to treat complaints fairly, this is also a theoretical ideal that is often totally disregarded in practice. The unstated and sole objective of the broker is to avoid (or evade) liability by any means available. Do not, therefore, expect fairness or sympathy and understanding; the firm will regard you as an enemy and treat you accordingly. You will be told that "our position is clear," which means "we will admit nothing and offer nothing, and if you want one dollar back then sue us, if you dare." The question is, should you dare?

Why It Would Indeed Be Daring
The odds are stacked against you, especially if you are dealing with a large firm. You will be stressed throughout the entire case, but the firm but will be as cool as the proverbial cucumber, because it will turn the case over to its compliance people and/or lawyers, who are familiar with all the tricks of the trade, have available resources of all kinds and who know that the converse applies to you. Such cases are often complex, invariably very time consuming and truly draining on all one's resources - financial, mental and physical.

The other side can and will run up massive legal fees, and if you back out part way you will owe them a frightening amount of money. The fees accruing on the other side are the real problem; they are used as a strategic weapon. The theory is that judges are infallible and if you lose, you were in the wrong, deserve no damages and should therefore pay the costs of the other side.

It is also common for the other side to try and avoid the real issues and merits of the case from ever being discussed openly and fairly. Thus, the civil process itself gets misused bureaucratically, through various administrative tricks and processes, while the actual financial mismanagement is either not dealt with at all, or simply denied validity.

Furthermore, the less of a case the firm has, the more they will resort to such tactics. The other side will probably believe it has a better chance of escaping liability by mismanaging your complaint and manipulating (or taking its chances with) the civil system than dealing with you fairly out of court, especially if you are in the right.

In addition you can still lose in court because the judge gets it wrong or the broker hires legal and financial "experts" who manage to convince him (incorrectly) that the merits of the case are weak. There are a lot of financial people out there who will testify to anything for a not-so-modest fee. Justice is definitely not always done, hence the saying "on the high seas and in court, you are in God's hands."

The ugly reality is that investors generally lose money because the investment was too risky, but trying to get damages out of the broker or firm is also fraught with financial and other risks. This all sounds daunting and rightly so. The emphasis must be made that you can still win, but you need to be aware of the harsh realities. Litigation, just like investments, can be missold.

On the Other Hand …
If you are not dealing with a big firm, there is a far more level playing field and you have a much better chance. Likewise, if you have legal insurance that will cover most of the cost, you can proceed more easily. It is also sometimes possible to get "after-the-fact insurance," which is not cheap, but it does mean your potential losses have a ceiling.

Furthermore, if you do have a powerful case, are mentally and physically tough, relatively risk friendly and/or lost a lot of money (but hopefully still have a lot) and really want to see justice done, it may still be worth going for it, even against a big player.

The Bottom Line
A financial damages claim is not for the fainthearted, but it may be worth it in the end. Make sure you think things through very carefully before the cost "clock" starts ticking away, and bear in mind that you will probably not get objective advice from a lawyer who is keen to sell (or missell) litigation. Suing a large firm is certainly difficult, but it is not impossible and it may be worth trying. The more level the playing field in terms of resources, the better your chances. Either way, the unfortunate reality is that litigation is an investment in itself, with its own risks and rewards. There are substantial costs involved, both financial and non-financial. All these factors need to be weighed up in advance and a sensible decision made. In some cases, it is better to live with the losses.

Related Articles
  1. Insurance

    Are You Trying To Get Sued?!

    Organizational lawsuits are commonplace these days. Knowing how to react to and (more importantly) prevent them can save your business.
  2. Personal Finance

    How To Pick The Right Lawyer

    Find out what factors to consider before hiring an attorney.
  3. Professionals

    Ethical Issues For Financial Advisors

    Learn what to do when that devil on your shoulder begins to whisper.
  4. Investing

    Automating Your 401(k) is Easier Than You Think

    If you like automation, you should check out these features that many 401(k) plans offer.
  5. Term

    Understanding Total Returns

    Total return measures the rate of return earned from an investment over a period of time.
  6. Mutual Funds & ETFs

    ETF Analysis: Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corp Bd

    Learn about the Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corporate Bond ETF, and explore detailed analysis of the fund's characteristics, risks and historical statistics.
  7. Technical Indicators

    Use Market Volume Data to Determine a Bottom

    Market bottoms often carve out classic volume patterns that let observant traders make fast and accurate calls.
  8. Investing

    The 8 Best Business and Finance T.V. Shows

    With so many talking heads to choose from, which is the right show for your business and money matter needs? We review the best shows on now.
  9. Professionals

    Social Security 'Start, Stop, Start' Explained

    The start, stop, start Social Security strategy is complicated. Here's what retirees considering it need to consider.
  10. Stock Analysis

    Should You Follow Millionaires into This Sector?

    Millionaire investors—and those who follow them—should take another look at the current economic situation before making any more investment decisions.
RELATED TERMS
  1. Excess Judgment Loss

    The amount of additional loss that an insurer is required to ...
  2. Honorable Undertaking

    A reinsurance treaty clause indicating that the agreement should ...
  3. Financial Singularity

    A financial singularity is the point at which investment decisions ...
  4. De Novo Judicial Review

    A standard of review that does not place weight on the previous ...
  5. D’Oench Duhme Doctrine

    A banking rule which states that a borrower or guarantor cannot ...
  6. Equitable Division

    A legal theory that guides how property acquired during the course ...
RELATED FAQS
  1. What is the difference between legal liability and public liability?

    When you see the term "public liability" attached to a business, its products or its services, it refers to a specific type ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. Under what circumstances would I benefit from a high net worth insurance policy?

    A high-net-worth insurance policy is specifically tailored to suit the needs of high-net-worth individuals. It is specifically ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Under what circumstances would I require private wealth management?

    An investor who is a high-net-worth individual (HNWI) may require private wealth management services. HNWIs have unique financial ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. When is litigation better than mediation in a high net worth divorce case?

    Typically, litigation is better than mediation in high-net-worth divorce cases for two major situations – when there are ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. Why are fee-based accounts preferred by many high net worth individuals (HNWI)?

    High net worth individuals (HNWIs) often prefer fee-based investment accounts for reasons that include reduced conflicts ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. What is the difference between fee-only advisors and fee-based advisors?

    “Fee-only” and “fee-based” sound similar, but there are important differences between these types of financial advisers. ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center
×

You are using adblocking software

Want access to all of Investopedia? Add us to your “whitelist”
so you'll never miss a feature!