} had informed the client the trading results via email while RHB OSK Securities (Thailand) Plc. had sent trading transaction confirmations, statements of cash, collateral settlement, and credit balance

period and also made trading decisions during January 5-6, 2012 which Theera failed to prove that the orders were sent according to the client?s instruction.The Nongan Saetung case was also submitted by

which {A} failed to prove that the orders were sent according to the client's instruction.The {B} case was also submitted by his employer. The SEC then probed into the case and found from conversation

, she informed her client of the submission of trading orders to rectify trading orders of another person sent through incorrect type of account. Also, {A} admitted that she received trading orders from

orders were sent through over the internet and under her securities trader ID while the client acknowledged and did not reject the transactions. {A} admitted that she was the one submitting all trading

accurate records of clients trading orders. Upon the SEC regular investigation on nine securities firms and random inspections on trading orders sent by phone and at the trading room, the investor contacts

for the company in Hong Kong SAR, who provides services of gold futures contracts trading. The company has managed to have marketing officers to call and solicit investors to invest and sent out the

resolves clearly specifying offer price with an advance notice sent at least 14 days prior through SETLink, and the meeting notice contains all required particulars in compliance with the Notification of the

According to an inspection report submitted by Maybank Kim Eng and a complaint from a client and the SEC’s further investigation, it was found that during August 2011 – October 2018, {A} sent trading

seek unfair personal gains all over again.  In addition, some of the investment consultants sent selling orders of investment units in the clients' accounts by counterfeiting unit sale documents, opening