The FSA imposed a financial penalty of £70,000 (but gave a 30% reduction for early settlement which brought the figure down to £49,000) on Wills & Co for misconduct following the breach of principles 3 and 7 of the Principles for Business, in particular, for failing to ensure that its customers understood the risks involved with penny shares, and for being unclear, unfair and misleading when advising on the shares.
|
Fox Hayes approved financial promotions for overseas companies. The promotions took the form of letters to private investors offering a free research report into a company in which the investor already held shares. The FSA considered that Fox Hayes had not taken reasonable steps to ensure that the financial promotions were clear, fair and not misleading and imposed a penalty of £150,000. Fox Hayes referred the matter to the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal the FSA also argued that Fox Hayes had not ...
|
The firm gave an undertaking to re-word its description of its remuneration clause to clearer language in accordance with the Unfair Terms Regulations.
|
The firm gave an undertaking to re-word its description of its remuneration clause to clearer language in accordance with the Unfair Terms Regulations.
|
The FSA imposed fines of £10,500 on Lawrence Scoffield and Council Homebuyers and gave Mortgage Network a public censure in respect of management failings. The first two had failed to ensure that systems were in place so that only suitable mortgages were recommended and customers treated fairly. Mortgage Network did not have a system for keeping proper records relating to customers’ needs and circumstances and adequate training records.
|
The FSA imposed fines of £10,500 on Lawrence Scoffield and Council Homebuyers and gave Mortgage Network a public censure in respect of management failings. The first two had failed to ensure that systems were in place so that only suitable mortgages were recommended and customers treated fairly. Mortgage Network did not have a system for keeping proper records relating to customers’ needs and circumstances and adequate training records.
|
Mr Laury was not sufficiently identified in the FSA’s Final Notice in respect of his employer to permit him to refer the Notice pursuant to FSMA s. 393.
|
The FSA cancelled the Firm’s permission having withdrawn the approval granted to the Firm’s managing director and sole mortgage adviser. The Firm had been used to submit a number of fraudulent mortgage applications to lenders.
|
The FSA fined the Independent Financial Advisers £42,000 for management and complaints handling failings. The FSA found that the Firm had not been treating its customers fairly because it had not been responding to complaints in good time.
|
The FSA issued a prohibition order against the Director of Powell Price & Company Limited for accepting insurance premiums without passing them over to insurers; using client money to cover the Firm’s running costs; and failing to manage the Firm’s client account.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 |