The correct answer is B . A client-directed order does not eliminate the Registered Representative's suitability obligation. When an RR determines that a proposed investment action is unsuitable or does not put the client's interest first, CIRO requires the RR to inform the client of that determination and recommend a suitable alternative action .
CIRO's suitability guidance specifically states that where a client wants to make an unsuitable trade, the Registered Individual must advise the client against proceeding and “recommend an alternative action.” Current joint CSA/CIRO guidance further confirms the required sequence: explain why the proposed trade is unsuitable, recommend an alternative that is suitable and puts the client's interest first, and, if the client still insists on proceeding, confirm and document the client's instruction.
Accordingly, D is too absolute. CIRO states that an RR is not obligated to accept an unsuitable order, but outright refusal is not automatically required in every situation. The mandatory initial regulatory response is the suitability warning and alternative recommendation. A is unnecessary because the matter is handled under established Dealer procedures and suitability rules. C is not the prescribed regulatory treatment.
The CIRE syllabus requires understanding of retail-client suitability and the RR's responsibility for applying suitability requirements.
Study Guide Reference: CIRE Elements 3.1 and 3.10–3.13 — Registered Representative duties and retail-client suitability; IDPC Rule 3402(5).
===============
