FINRA's Six-Year Rule: Is Your Claim Still Eligible for Arbitration?
FINRA bars arbitration claims filed more than six years after the event giving rise to the dispute. If your losses are approaching that deadline, you need to act now.
Select the year of the transaction or event that caused your loss to get a preliminary estimate of your FINRA arbitration eligibility. This tool provides a general estimate only. The exact trigger date requires legal analysis of your specific facts.
When Did the Loss Event Occur?
Select the year of the transaction, recommendation, or discovery of misconduct
This tool is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Eligibility determinations require analysis of your specific facts. Contact the firm for a free case evaluation.
Understanding the Rule
What FINRA's Six-Year Eligibility Rule Actually Means
FINRA Rule 12206 provides that no claim shall be eligible for submission to FINRA arbitration where six years have elapsed from the occurrence or event giving rise to the claim. Unlike a traditional statute of limitations, this is an eligibility rule, meaning that FINRA arbitrators have no authority to hear a claim filed outside the six-year window, regardless of any equitable arguments or the merits of the underlying claim.
This rule operates independently of any state law statutes of limitations. Even if your state's securities fraud statute provides a longer limitations period, or if you recently discovered the misconduct through the discovery rule, FINRA arbitration remains unavailable once the six-year window has closed.
The clock starts from the "occurrence or event giving rise to the claim," a phrase that courts and arbitrators have interpreted in different ways depending on whether the claim sounds in fraud, breach of contract, suitability, or ongoing account management misconduct.
When the Clock Starts
Determining the Trigger Date: It Is Not Always What You Think
Transaction-based claims: For claims based on a specific purchase or sale, the trigger is generally the date of the transaction, not the date you discovered the loss or the misconduct.
Churning and excessive trading: Where the claim involves ongoing churning over an extended period, the six years typically runs from the last transaction that constitutes part of the pattern, which may extend the period significantly.
Account management claims: For discretionary accounts managed by an adviser on an ongoing basis, the trigger may be the last act of mismanagement or the date of each quarterly statement that reflected the loss.
Fraudulent concealment: Where a broker actively concealed the misconduct and the investor could not reasonably have discovered the fraud through due diligence, some panels have applied a discovery-based approach, though this is not uniformly accepted in FINRA arbitration.
Class action tolling: If you were a member of a class action lawsuit related to the same losses, the pendency of the class action may have tolled the FINRA eligibility period during certain periods. This requires analysis of the specific class action and its relationship to your individual FINRA claim.
FINRA Procedure Knowledge
Why the Right Attorney Can Make the Difference on a Six-Year Challenge
When a brokerage firm raises a six-year eligibility defense, the outcome often turns on legal arguments about when the triggering event actually occurred. Jorge L. Riera has litigated these questions before FINRA panels and brings the institutional knowledge of someone who spent a decade in SEC enforcement analyzing when securities violations arise and when they are discovered.
FINRA NAMC Appointment
As one of only 7 Public Members of FINRA's National Arbitration and Mediation Committee, appointed by the FINRA Board of Governors, Jorge participates in shaping the policies and procedures that govern FINRA arbitration nationally. That institutional knowledge directly benefits clients facing procedural challenges like six-year eligibility disputes.
2026 Reform Landscape
There has been ongoing discussion within the securities bar about whether FINRA's six-year eligibility rule should be reformed to incorporate a discovery-based component similar to federal securities law. As a PLI Securities Arbitration Faculty member and PIABA Arbitration Committee Co-Chair 2021 through 2024, Jorge is current on every development affecting FINRA's eligibility rules and how arbitrators are applying them in 2026.
If your claim is approaching the six-year window, do not wait. Contact the firm today for an immediate, no-cost eligibility review.
No. The six-year rule is an eligibility rule, not a statute of limitations. The distinction matters: a statute of limitations is a legal defense that can sometimes be waived, tolled, or overcome by equitable arguments. FINRA's eligibility rule is an absolute bar to jurisdiction. If the panel finds the claim is beyond six years, it has no authority to proceed, regardless of how sympathetic the facts may be.
It depends on the claim. FINRA's six-year eligibility rule governs whether a claim can be heard in FINRA arbitration. State law statutes of limitations govern state law claims. In a FINRA arbitration proceeding, state law claims that are time-barred under state law may still be dismissed on limitations grounds even if the six-year rule would otherwise permit the arbitration to proceed. The two time periods operate independently, and the shorter one can cut off specific theories of recovery.
Not necessarily. If the misconduct was actively concealed and you could not have discovered it through reasonable diligence, some arbitration panels have applied a discovery-based analysis to determine when the "occurrence or event" actually arose. Additionally, if the misconduct was ongoing (for example, continuing misrepresentations on account statements), the six years may run from a more recent date. State court may also remain an option for certain claims, particularly if your adviser was a registered investment adviser rather than a broker-dealer. An immediate consultation is critical.
FINRA arbitration claims are initiated by filing a Statement of Claim with the required filing fee. The filing date, not the date of service or any subsequent event, determines whether the six-year eligibility deadline is met. If your claim is approaching the deadline, contact the firm immediately. We can evaluate your claim and file on an expedited basis when the timeline requires it.
Do Not Wait
The Six-Year Clock Does Not Stop.
If your investment losses involve a transaction or event that is approaching the six-year mark, an immediate consultation is not optional. Contact the firm today for a free eligibility evaluation before the window closes permanently.
FINRA's Six-Year Rule: Is Your Claim Still Eligible for Arbitration?
FINRA bars arbitration claims filed more than six years after the event giving rise to the dispute. If your losses are approaching that deadline, you need to act now.
Select the year of the transaction or event that caused your loss to get a preliminary estimate of your FINRA arbitration eligibility. This tool provides a general estimate only. The exact trigger date requires legal analysis of your specific facts.
When Did the Loss Event Occur?
Select the year of the transaction, recommendation, or discovery of misconduct
This tool is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Eligibility determinations require analysis of your specific facts. Contact the firm for a free case evaluation.
Understanding the Rule
What FINRA's Six-Year Eligibility Rule Actually Means
FINRA Rule 12206 provides that no claim shall be eligible for submission to FINRA arbitration where six years have elapsed from the occurrence or event giving rise to the claim. Unlike a traditional statute of limitations, this is an eligibility rule, meaning that FINRA arbitrators have no authority to hear a claim filed outside the six-year window, regardless of any equitable arguments or the merits of the underlying claim.
This rule operates independently of any state law statutes of limitations. Even if your state's securities fraud statute provides a longer limitations period, or if you recently discovered the misconduct through the discovery rule, FINRA arbitration remains unavailable once the six-year window has closed.
The clock starts from the "occurrence or event giving rise to the claim," a phrase that courts and arbitrators have interpreted in different ways depending on whether the claim sounds in fraud, breach of contract, suitability, or ongoing account management misconduct.
When the Clock Starts
Determining the Trigger Date: It Is Not Always What You Think
Transaction-based claims: For claims based on a specific purchase or sale, the trigger is generally the date of the transaction, not the date you discovered the loss or the misconduct.
Churning and excessive trading: Where the claim involves ongoing churning over an extended period, the six years typically runs from the last transaction that constitutes part of the pattern, which may extend the period significantly.
Account management claims: For discretionary accounts managed by an adviser on an ongoing basis, the trigger may be the last act of mismanagement or the date of each quarterly statement that reflected the loss.
Fraudulent concealment: Where a broker actively concealed the misconduct and the investor could not reasonably have discovered the fraud through due diligence, some panels have applied a discovery-based approach, though this is not uniformly accepted in FINRA arbitration.
Class action tolling: If you were a member of a class action lawsuit related to the same losses, the pendency of the class action may have tolled the FINRA eligibility period during certain periods. This requires analysis of the specific class action and its relationship to your individual FINRA claim.
FINRA Procedure Knowledge
Why the Right Attorney Can Make the Difference on a Six-Year Challenge
When a brokerage firm raises a six-year eligibility defense, the outcome often turns on legal arguments about when the triggering event actually occurred. Jorge L. Riera has litigated these questions before FINRA panels and brings the institutional knowledge of someone who spent a decade in SEC enforcement analyzing when securities violations arise and when they are discovered.
FINRA NAMC Appointment
As one of only 7 Public Members of FINRA's National Arbitration and Mediation Committee, appointed by the FINRA Board of Governors, Jorge participates in shaping the policies and procedures that govern FINRA arbitration nationally. That institutional knowledge directly benefits clients facing procedural challenges like six-year eligibility disputes.
2026 Reform Landscape
There has been ongoing discussion within the securities bar about whether FINRA's six-year eligibility rule should be reformed to incorporate a discovery-based component similar to federal securities law. As a PLI Securities Arbitration Faculty member and PIABA Arbitration Committee Co-Chair 2021 through 2024, Jorge is current on every development affecting FINRA's eligibility rules and how arbitrators are applying them in 2026.
If your claim is approaching the six-year window, do not wait. Contact the firm today for an immediate, no-cost eligibility review.
No. The six-year rule is an eligibility rule, not a statute of limitations. The distinction matters: a statute of limitations is a legal defense that can sometimes be waived, tolled, or overcome by equitable arguments. FINRA's eligibility rule is an absolute bar to jurisdiction. If the panel finds the claim is beyond six years, it has no authority to proceed, regardless of how sympathetic the facts may be.
It depends on the claim. FINRA's six-year eligibility rule governs whether a claim can be heard in FINRA arbitration. State law statutes of limitations govern state law claims. In a FINRA arbitration proceeding, state law claims that are time-barred under state law may still be dismissed on limitations grounds even if the six-year rule would otherwise permit the arbitration to proceed. The two time periods operate independently, and the shorter one can cut off specific theories of recovery.
Not necessarily. If the misconduct was actively concealed and you could not have discovered it through reasonable diligence, some arbitration panels have applied a discovery-based analysis to determine when the "occurrence or event" actually arose. Additionally, if the misconduct was ongoing (for example, continuing misrepresentations on account statements), the six years may run from a more recent date. State court may also remain an option for certain claims, particularly if your adviser was a registered investment adviser rather than a broker-dealer. An immediate consultation is critical.
FINRA arbitration claims are initiated by filing a Statement of Claim with the required filing fee. The filing date, not the date of service or any subsequent event, determines whether the six-year eligibility deadline is met. If your claim is approaching the deadline, contact the firm immediately. We can evaluate your claim and file on an expedited basis when the timeline requires it.
Do Not Wait
The Six-Year Clock Does Not Stop.
If your investment losses involve a transaction or event that is approaching the six-year mark, an immediate consultation is not optional. Contact the firm today for a free eligibility evaluation before the window closes permanently.
FINRA's Six-Year Rule: Is Your Claim Still Eligible for Arbitration?
FINRA bars arbitration claims filed more than six years after the event giving rise to the dispute. If your losses are approaching that deadline, you need to act now.
Select the year of the transaction or event that caused your loss to get a preliminary estimate of your FINRA arbitration eligibility. This tool provides a general estimate only. The exact trigger date requires legal analysis of your specific facts.
When Did the Loss Event Occur?
Select the year of the transaction, recommendation, or discovery of misconduct
This tool is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Eligibility determinations require analysis of your specific facts. Contact the firm for a free case evaluation.
Understanding the Rule
What FINRA's Six-Year Eligibility Rule Actually Means
FINRA Rule 12206 provides that no claim shall be eligible for submission to FINRA arbitration where six years have elapsed from the occurrence or event giving rise to the claim. Unlike a traditional statute of limitations, this is an eligibility rule, meaning that FINRA arbitrators have no authority to hear a claim filed outside the six-year window, regardless of any equitable arguments or the merits of the underlying claim.
This rule operates independently of any state law statutes of limitations. Even if your state's securities fraud statute provides a longer limitations period, or if you recently discovered the misconduct through the discovery rule, FINRA arbitration remains unavailable once the six-year window has closed.
The clock starts from the "occurrence or event giving rise to the claim," a phrase that courts and arbitrators have interpreted in different ways depending on whether the claim sounds in fraud, breach of contract, suitability, or ongoing account management misconduct.
When the Clock Starts
Determining the Trigger Date: It Is Not Always What You Think
Transaction-based claims: For claims based on a specific purchase or sale, the trigger is generally the date of the transaction, not the date you discovered the loss or the misconduct.
Churning and excessive trading: Where the claim involves ongoing churning over an extended period, the six years typically runs from the last transaction that constitutes part of the pattern, which may extend the period significantly.
Account management claims: For discretionary accounts managed by an adviser on an ongoing basis, the trigger may be the last act of mismanagement or the date of each quarterly statement that reflected the loss.
Fraudulent concealment: Where a broker actively concealed the misconduct and the investor could not reasonably have discovered the fraud through due diligence, some panels have applied a discovery-based approach, though this is not uniformly accepted in FINRA arbitration.
Class action tolling: If you were a member of a class action lawsuit related to the same losses, the pendency of the class action may have tolled the FINRA eligibility period during certain periods. This requires analysis of the specific class action and its relationship to your individual FINRA claim.
FINRA Procedure Knowledge
Why the Right Attorney Can Make the Difference on a Six-Year Challenge
When a brokerage firm raises a six-year eligibility defense, the outcome often turns on legal arguments about when the triggering event actually occurred. Jorge L. Riera has litigated these questions before FINRA panels and brings the institutional knowledge of someone who spent a decade in SEC enforcement analyzing when securities violations arise and when they are discovered.
FINRA NAMC Appointment
As one of only 7 Public Members of FINRA's National Arbitration and Mediation Committee, appointed by the FINRA Board of Governors, Jorge participates in shaping the policies and procedures that govern FINRA arbitration nationally. That institutional knowledge directly benefits clients facing procedural challenges like six-year eligibility disputes.
2026 Reform Landscape
There has been ongoing discussion within the securities bar about whether FINRA's six-year eligibility rule should be reformed to incorporate a discovery-based component similar to federal securities law. As a PLI Securities Arbitration Faculty member and PIABA Arbitration Committee Co-Chair 2021 through 2024, Jorge is current on every development affecting FINRA's eligibility rules and how arbitrators are applying them in 2026.
If your claim is approaching the six-year window, do not wait. Contact the firm today for an immediate, no-cost eligibility review.
No. The six-year rule is an eligibility rule, not a statute of limitations. The distinction matters: a statute of limitations is a legal defense that can sometimes be waived, tolled, or overcome by equitable arguments. FINRA's eligibility rule is an absolute bar to jurisdiction. If the panel finds the claim is beyond six years, it has no authority to proceed, regardless of how sympathetic the facts may be.
It depends on the claim. FINRA's six-year eligibility rule governs whether a claim can be heard in FINRA arbitration. State law statutes of limitations govern state law claims. In a FINRA arbitration proceeding, state law claims that are time-barred under state law may still be dismissed on limitations grounds even if the six-year rule would otherwise permit the arbitration to proceed. The two time periods operate independently, and the shorter one can cut off specific theories of recovery.
Not necessarily. If the misconduct was actively concealed and you could not have discovered it through reasonable diligence, some arbitration panels have applied a discovery-based analysis to determine when the "occurrence or event" actually arose. Additionally, if the misconduct was ongoing (for example, continuing misrepresentations on account statements), the six years may run from a more recent date. State court may also remain an option for certain claims, particularly if your adviser was a registered investment adviser rather than a broker-dealer. An immediate consultation is critical.
FINRA arbitration claims are initiated by filing a Statement of Claim with the required filing fee. The filing date, not the date of service or any subsequent event, determines whether the six-year eligibility deadline is met. If your claim is approaching the deadline, contact the firm immediately. We can evaluate your claim and file on an expedited basis when the timeline requires it.
Do Not Wait
The Six-Year Clock Does Not Stop.
If your investment losses involve a transaction or event that is approaching the six-year mark, an immediate consultation is not optional. Contact the firm today for a free eligibility evaluation before the window closes permanently.