A regulatory hearing panel has handed down $2.2 million in sanctions — including fines, disgorgement and costs — against brokerage firm, Hampton Securities Ltd., and its co-founder, Peter Deeb, for trading misconduct.
In April 2025, a hearing panel of the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) found that Deeb and Hampton breached its rules in connection with certain trading practices, and for failing to maintain accurate trading records.
Among other things, the panel found that starting in 2019, Deeb improperly obtained credit for a non-arm’s length client account, improperly obtained credit from its carrying broker and failed to realize certain trading losses in a timely way, which “allowed losses to increase to amounts that at times exceeded Hampton’s entire risk adjusted capital.”
Ultimately, the improper practices resulted in a $1.9-million trading loss for the firm that occurred when the market crashed in early 2020 with the onset of the pandemic.
Now, the panel has imposed sanctions in the case, including a $500,000 fine against Deeb and $250,000 against the firm. It also ordered $1.2 million in disgorgement against Deeb, along with $230,000 in costs against him, and $20,000 in costs against the firm.
Deeb’s registration was also suspended for one year, he was prohibited from serving as an executive for three years, and is permanently banned from functioning as a firm’s ultimate designated person (UDP) — and Hampton was ordered to appoint a new CEO and UDP within 90 days.
The sanctions were somewhat softer than CIRO staff sought. In particular, it called for a $1-million fine on the firm, and a two-year suspension for Deeb — whereas the respondents argued for a $90,000 fine on Deeb and $35,000 for Hampton.
While the panel acknowledged that Deeb ultimately took responsibility for the $1.9-million loss, and compensated the firm, it also ruled that he engaged in “very serious misconduct that requires significant sanctions” — including a large fine, disgorgement and a registration suspension.
“Finally, Mr. Deeb’s conduct in intentionally breaching the rules governing average price accounts, hiding his misconduct from supervisory review and his dishonest dealing with CIRO is inimical to the obligation of the UDP to promote a culture of compliance at his firm and to set the tone from the top,” it concluded. “He should not be permitted to act as a UDP in the future.”