The FSA fined David Bedford and prohibited him from performing any regulated function with effect from 2 November 2011. Mr Bedford was responsible for running the financial risk division of ESR Insurance Services Limited and was approved to perform CF 1 function. He placed surety bonds and other insurance on behalf of ESR clients with a third party. He became aware that the third party was accepting premiums, but not placing the insurance. He continued to advance premiums and thereby facilitated ...
|
The FSA fined Credit Suisse £5.95 m for systems and controls failures in relation to sales of structured capital at risk products. Over a 3 year period Credit Suisse customers invested over £1 billion SCARPs. The FSA found that there were serious failings in the sales including inadequate systems and controls in relation to assessing customer's attitudes to risk; failing to take reasonable care to evidence properly the suitability of SCARPS for customers; and failing to monitor staff effectively ...
|
The FSA imposed its biggest individual fine to date on an Indian investor in respect of the manipulation of the closing share price of a Reliance Industries in order to mitigate losses under a structured product which fell to be determined by the closing price. The FSA fined Mr Goenka $9.6 million.
|
In an action to recover a credit card debt, the bank was not entitled to summary judgment where the customer had a real prospect of success of showing the default notice did not comply with s. 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. While there may be a knock out argument available to the bank, its absence from the summary judgment application or in the hearing meant that it could not be relied on to justify an appeal.
|
The alleged estoppel of the bank from pursing its guarantee rights on the basis that the bank had represented that if it was appointed as lead manager for a refinancing transaction it would refrain from enforcing the existing agreements had no real prospect of success. The contemporaneous evidence was overwhelmingly inconsistent with the existence of an alleged representation. For this and other reasons the bank obtained summary judgment.
|
The Defendant's allegations that a spread betting company had failed to comply with various provisions of the Handbook failed. The company's application form contained a clearly expressed risk warning notice. In assessing whether the company had provided advice rather an execution only service care had to be taken to distinguish between the interpretation of market data and passing on market commentary. There was always a degree of 'spin' when views others are summarized, but the evidence did no ...
|
The FSA was not required to give a cross-undertaking to third parties when obtaining a freezing injunction because it was exercising a law enforcement function.
|
The FSA imposed a financial penalty of £494,900 (reduced from £707,000 after early settlement of 30%) for failing to keep adequate client records and failing to ensure that client money was properly segregated.
|
An application to the Upper Tribunal by a firm authorised to carry out designated investment business and mortgage mediation business. In October 2009, the FSA contacted the firm to carry out an initial assessment. Following that assessment, the FSA informed the firm that adequate action had been taken to ensure fair outcomes for customers and thus they were not treating the customers fairly, which had to be central to the firm's working culture. The FSA proposed to visit for further assessment. ...
|
Legal advice provided to a company in respect of the affairs of a company became subject on the facts to joint legal professional privilege with the directors. In the circumstances the wavier by the liquidator of the company's privilege was not a waiver of the directors' privilege and the FSA were not therefore entitled to rely on the legal advice in its investigations.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |