The FSA fined this mortgage broker £63,000 after finindg the firm failed to ensure it gave suitable advice, and did not communicate accurate informations about mortgage charges to its customers.
|
The FSA obtained a permanent injunction preventing Treadstone Corp Ltd from illegally promoting and selling shares to UK investors in a scheme which involved the company issuing false share certificates and shares at a price more than their true worth.
|
The FSA fined the UK operations of Credit Suisse £5,600,000 for breaching FSA Principles 2 and 3 in respect of the business of its Structured Credti Group and not acting in a timely way in respect of concerns identified about the pricing of certain asset backed positions and inadequate controls in failing to recognise the wrong valuations.
|
The failure by Mr Ravjani, a sole trader mortgage and general insurance intermediary to disclose when applying for authorisation that he had been declared bankrupt in 1995 justified the FSA’s decision on discovery to remove his authorisation with immediate effect. The authorisation and approval process does not leave any room for self assessment on the part of the Applicant in terms of the materiality or relevance of material in response to direct questions.
|
The FSA banned this mortgage broker and fined him £100,000. This is the eighteenth broker banned this year
|
The FSA fined Hastings £735,000 for failing to treat its customers fairly after it cancelled multiple insurance policies which were incorrectly priced after an internal price quoting system went wrong. The FSA found that Hastings’ reliance on a cancellation clause which was not generally intended to be used in such circumstances was unfair.
|
The FSA commenced its second criminal case over alleged insider dealing against a former trader at Cazenove, Malcolm Calvert in respect of trades made after he had left Cazenove in respect of HP Bulmer plc, Macdonald Hotels plc, Vernalis plc, Johnston Group plc and others.
|
The FSA has provisionally fined Winterflood £4 million over share dealing in an AIM-listed company. This is the biggest fine for market abuse on a regulated firm. Winterflood has referred the decision to the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal.
|
The Tribunal considered the criteria for granting permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal on a point of law under section 137 (1) of FSMA. Where the Tribunal had upheld the FSA’s conclusion that the firm’s Part IV permission should be cancelled where it had not paid a FOS Award despite having resisted its enforcement in civil proceedings. Such a decision was a determination of fact and was not amenable to appeal under section 137.
|
The FSA fined MSG the sum of £77,000 for inadequate protection of customers’ details. This was the first time that a stockbroking firm has been fined for weak data security controls.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |