Reset to Today

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004.

Content Options:

Content Options

View Options:

APER 4.7 Statement of Principle 7

APER 4.7.1G

The Statement of Principle 7 (see APER 2.1.2 P) is in the following terms: "An approved person performing a significant influence function must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the firm for which he is responsible in his controlled function complies with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system."

APER 4.7.2ERP

In the opinion of the FSA, conduct of the type described in APER 4.7.3 E, APER 4.7.4 E, APER 4.7.5 E, APER 4.7.7 E, APER 4.7.9 E, APER 4.7.10 E orAPER 4.7.11A E3 does not comply with Statement of Principle 7 (APER 2.1.2 P).

APER 4.7.3ERP

Failing to take reasonable steps to implement (either personally or through a compliance department or other departments) adequate and appropriate systems of control to comply with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system in respect of its regulated activities falls within APER 4.7.2 E. In the case of an approved person who is responsible, under SYSC 2.1.3 R (2) or SYSC 4.4.5 R (2)2, with overseeing the firm's obligation under SYSC 3.1.1 R or SYSC 4.1.1 R2, failing to take reasonable care to oversee the establishment and maintenance of appropriate systems and controls falls within APER 4.7.2 E.

APER 4.7.4ERP

Failing to take reasonable steps to monitor (either personally or through a compliance department or other departments) compliance with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system in respect of its regulated activities falls within APER 4.7.2 E (see APER 4.7.12 G).

APER 4.7.5ERP

Failing to take reasonable steps adequately to inform himself about the reason why significant breaches (whether suspected or actual) of the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system in respect of its regulated activities may have arisen (taking account of the systems and procedures in place) falls within APER 4.7.2 E.

APER 4.7.6ERP

Behaviour of the type referred to in APER 4.7.5 E includes, but is not limited to, failing to investigate what systems or procedures may have failed including, where appropriate, failing to obtain expert opinion on the adequacy of the systems and procedures.

APER 4.7.7ERP

Failing to take reasonable steps to ensure that procedures and systems of control are reviewed and, if appropriate, improved, following the identification of significant breaches (whether suspected or actual) of the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system relating to its regulated activities, falls within APER 4.7.2 E (see APER 4.7.13 G).

APER 4.7.8ERP

Behaviour of the type referred to in APER 4.7.7 E includes, but is not limited to:

  1. (1)

    unreasonably failing to implement recommendations for improvements in systems and procedures;

  2. (2)

    unreasonably failing to implement recommendations for improvements to systems and procedures in a timely manner.

APER 4.7.9ERP

In the case of the money laundering reporting officer, failing to discharge the responsibilities imposed on him by the firm1 in accordance with SYSC 3.2.6I R or SYSC 6.3.9 R21 falls within APER 4.7.2 E.

1
APER 4.7.10ERP

In the case of an approved person performing a significant influence function responsible for compliance under SYSC 3.2.8 R, SYSC 6.1.4 R or SYSC 6.1.4A R2, failing to take reasonable steps to ensure that appropriate compliance systems and procedures are in place falls within APER 4.7.2 E (see APER 4.7.14 G).

APER 4.7.11GRP

The FSA expects an approved person performing a significant influence function to take reasonable steps both to ensure his firm's compliance with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system and to ensure that all staff are aware of the need for compliance.

APER 4.7.11AERP

3Where the approved person is a proprietary trader under SUP 10.9.10 R (1A), failing to maintain and comply with appropriate systems and controls in relation to that activity falls within APER 4.7.2 E.

Systems of control

APER 4.7.12GRP

An approved person performing a significant influence function need not himself put in place the systems of control in his business (APER 4.7.4 E). Whether he does this depends on his role and responsibilities. He should, however, take reasonable steps to ensure that the business for which he is responsible has operating procedures and systems which include well-defined steps for complying with the detail of relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system and for ensuring that the business is run prudently. The nature and extent of the systems of control that are required will depend upon the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system, and the nature, scale and complexity of the business (see APER 3.3.2).

Possible breaches of regulatory requirements

APER 4.7.13GRP

Where the approved person performing a significant influence function becomes aware of actual or suspected problems that involve possible breaches of relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system falling within his area of responsibility, then he should take reasonable steps to ensure that they are dealt with in a timely and appropriate manner (APER 4.7.7 E). This may involve an adequate investigation to find out what systems or procedures may have failed and why. He may need to obtain expert opinion on the adequacy and efficacy of the systems and procedures.

Review and improvement of systems and procedures

APER 4.7.14GRP

Where independent reviews of systems and procedures have been undertaken and result in recommendations for improvement, the approved person performing a significant influence function should ensure that, unless there are good reasons not to, any reasonable recommendations are implemented in a timely manner (APER 4.7.10 E). What is reasonable will depend on the nature of the inadequacy and the cost of the improvement. It will be reasonable for the approved person performing a significant influence function to carry out a cost benefit analysis when assessing whether the recommendations are reasonable.