There are many factors that make human beings so special, and yet our ability to help ourselves through every situation probably gets a higher stature than the rest. This particular ability is largely why we have been so successful in terms of pursuing constant progression. Now, when you are allowing such a dynamic to run the show, you can rightfully expect certain incentives to go up for grabs, and that’s exactly how things have panned out for us. If we take a moment and look into the history, we’ll see some really evident benefits emerging out of the said setup. While the volume might seem like a lot, discerning the most impactful one shouldn’t be a tough job, as technology literally runs away with that honor. Honestly, we had no business developing a concept so advanced. In a way, the creation still transcends whatever humans are capable of imagining, but our innate tendency to just keep finding a solution under all conditions would eventually guide us to this phenomenon and change the way we look at everything. Nevertheless, technology’s generational specifications do come with a few limitations of their own. In fact, we saw these limitations get another depiction during a recent case involving Robinhood.
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s arbitration service has directed trading platform, Robinhood to pay Jose Batista $30,000 after the trader was unfairly stopped from selling his stock. The case dates back all the way to January 2021, when the platform had put some trading restrictions in place. It was a decision influenced by what was happening with the GameStop stock. As a group of retail investors aggressively tried to balloon up the GameStop’s stock value, brokers across the board quickly started experiencing trading halts and many other technical glitches. In a bid to control the frenzy, Robinhood introduced a temporary freeze, which resulted in a major loss for Jose Batista and many other traders.
Interestingly enough, even though the freeze ended up inviting plenty of lawsuits against Robinhood, not everyone got a chance to recover their losses like Batista. When asked about it, Batista’s lawyer put the judgment down to their focus on “Robinhood’s inadequate liquidity management practices and monitoring of its counterparty risk.” He also shed some light on how they “attacked, head-on, the notion that Robinhood’s customer agreement gives it unfettered right to restrict trading for any reason, at any time.”
According to the reports, Robinhood will also have to pay up a year’s interest on the owed money, along with pay filings and other relevant fees.
