The FSA made a decision to prohibit a mortgage adviser, Mr Chowdhury, based in Tower Hamlets for certifying fraudulent mortgage applications. He also operated his firm Express Financial without being approved by the FSA as required. The FSA was informed by three lenders that they had removed Express Financial from their panels of mortgage introducers due to concerns over the submission of false documentation in relation to mortgage applications being supported by fraudulent passports, bank state ...
|
The FSA has banned and fined Mr Montserret, a former portfolio manager at BlueCrest Capital Management Limited, £35,000 for deliberately mismarking his positions in an attempt to avoid losing his job over losses he was making on his trading book. Mr Montserret agreed to settle this matter early and, therefore, qualified for a 30% reduction in the financial penalty that was originally £50,000. The FSA found that Mr Montserret’s actions had distorted the intra-month value of the Fund. However, at ...
|
On 6 May 2008, Mr Mohammad Rana trading as Countrywide Management Consultancy and as Property Compass (“Countrywide”) entered into a ‘Settlement Agreement’ with the FSA. Countrywide failed to comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and also failed to comply with rules that require the payment of regulatory fees and levies owed to the FSA. Consequently, the FSA has cancelled its Part IV permission.
|
On 24 April 2009, the FSA announced that it is to go ahead with proposed changes to the compensation limits for insurance, investment and home finance advice business in the event of a firm failing, designed to achieve greater simplicity and consistency in the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. The changes that will come into effect on 1 January 2010 mean the compensation limit for investments, home finance advice and deposits will be the same at £50,000 and all claims for non-compulsory i ...
|
Peter and James Dean were mortgage brokers for UK Finance House Ltd (UKFH) based in Dorset. The FSA imposed a ban on the brokers for failing to prevent their firm from being used to perpetrate financial crime and for other serious regulatory failures. In addition, the FSA withdrew the approval of Peter Dean to perform the controlled functions: CF1- Director and CF8 - Apportionment Oversight and fined him £17,500 for failing to exercise due skill, care and diligence in managing the business of U ...
|
The legal right of set-off was permissive rather than mandatory and had been determined in HSBC v Kloeckner & Co and Coca-Cola Financial Corporation v Finsat International. Thus when a building society issued a certificate of deposit in accordance with the CREST rules and expressly provided that it was issued without any rights of set-off, the building society was not entitled to set-off unpaid certificates of deposits also issued under the CREST programme.
|
The FSA’s first insider dealing criminal prosecution led to convictions of a solicitor and his father-in-law in respect of profits made from knowledge acquired in his position of General Counsel for TTP Communications in respect of a proposed take-over of the company. The FSA obtained a court order freezing the profits made from the trade. Both received sentences of imprisonment, the father-in-law’s sentence being suspended.
|
The FSA banned Ashfad Ahmed from performing any function in relation to any regulated activity. He had also traded as Dockside Mortgages. Mr Ahmed had submitted two mortgage application forms for himself through Eastside Mortgages providing false and misleading information about his self-employed income. The FSA decided that Mr Ahmed had failed to conduct himself with honesty and integrity.
|
The FSA publicly censured a mortgage broking firm for failing to ensure it provided suitable advice and exposing up to 80 of its customers to the risk of being sold an unsuitable self-certified mortgage.
|
The FSA fined a broker specialising in managing insurance claims for property repairs £21,000 for not maintaining appropriate systems and controls for the recruitment, training and monitoring of appointed representatives; for misleading clients by telling them that its services were free of charge when cancellation charges could be incurred and appointed representatives had a discretion to charge an insurance excess and that all its contractors were screened and only quality local tradesmen were ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |