Related provisions for LR 10.1.5
161 - 180 of 557 items.
The purpose of REC 3.16 is to ensure that the FSA receives a copy of the UK recognised body's plans and arrangements for ensuring business continuity if there are major problems with its computer systems. The FSA does not need to be notified of minor revisions to, or updating of, the documents containing a UK recognised body's business continuity plan (for example, changes to contact names or telephone numbers).
Where any reserve information technology system of a UK recognised body fails in such a way that, if the main information technology system of that body were also to fail, it would be unable to operate any of its facilities during its normal hours of operation, that body must immediately give the FSA notice of that event, and inform the FSA:(1) what action that UK recognised body is taking to restore the operation of the reserve information technology system; and (2) when it is
(1) The RDC is separate from the FSA's executive management structure. Apart from its Chairman, none of the members of the RDC is an FSAemployee.(2) All members of the RDC are appointed for fixed periods by the FSA Board. The FSA Board may remove a member of the RDC, but only in the event of that member's misconduct or incapacity.
The FSA expects to have an open, cooperative and constructive relationship with UK recognised bodies to enable it to have a broad picture of the UK recognised body's activities and its ability to meet the recognition requirements. This broad picture is intended to complement the information which the FSA will obtain under section 293 of the Act (Notification requirements) or under notification rules made under that section (see REC 3). The FSA will usually arrange meetings between
Information is needed to support the FSA's risk based approach to the supervision of all regulated entities. Risk based supervision is intended to ensure that the allocation of supervisory resources and the supervisory process are compatible with the regulatory objectives and the FSA's general duties under the Act. The central element of the process of risk based supervision is a systematic assessment by the FSA (a risk assessment) of the main supervisory risks and concerns for
For each UK recognised body, the FSA will conduct a periodic risk assessment. This assessment will take into account relevant considerations including the special position of recognised bodies under the Act, the nature of the UK recognised body's members, the position of other users of its facilities and the business environment more generally.
The risk assessment will guide the FSA's supervisory focus. It is important, therefore, that there is good dialogue between the FSA and the recognised body. The FSA expects to review its risk assessment with the staff of the UK recognised body to ensure factual accuracy and a shared understanding of the key issues, and may discuss the results of the risk assessment with key individuals of the UK recognised body. If appropriate, the FSA may send a detailed letter to the body's
Section 81 of the Act (supplementary listing particulars) requires
an issuer to submit supplementary listing particulars to the FSA for approval if at any time after listing particulars have been submitted
to the FSA and before the commencement of dealings
in the securities following
their admission to the official list:(1) there is a significant change affecting
any matter contained in those particulars the inclusion of which was required
by:(a) section 80 of the Act (general
1If
final terms of the offer are not included in the listing
particulars:(1) the final terms must be provided
to investors and filed with the FSA, and made available to the public,
as if the relevant requirements in PR 3.2 and the PD Regulation applied
to them; and(2) the listing
particulars must disclose the criteria and/or the conditions
in accordance with which the above elements will be determined or, in the
case of price, the maximum price.
The FSA will apply the following principles of construction to determine whether a contract is a contract of insurance.(1) In applying the description in PERG 6.3.4 G, more weight attaches to the substance of the contract, than to the form of the contract. The form of the contract is relevant (see PERG 6.6.8 G (3) and (4)) but not decisive of whether a contract is a contract of insurance: Fuji Finance Inc. v. Aetna Life Insurance Co. Ltd [1997] Ch. 173 (C.A.).(2) In particular,
If it appears to the FSA, or FOS Ltd (in relation to any FOS case fee only), that in the exceptional circumstances of a particular case, the payment of any fee or FOS levy would be inequitable, the FSA or FOS Ltd, as relevant, may (unless FEES 2.3.2B R applies)1 reduce or remit all or part of the fee or levy in question which would otherwise be payable.
If it appears to the FSA, or FOS Ltd (in relation to any FOS case fee only), that in the exceptional circumstances of a particular case to which FEES 2.3.1R does not apply, the retention by the FSA, or FOS Ltd, as relevant, of a fee or FOS levy which has been paid would be inequitable, the FSA, or FOS Ltd, may (unless FEES 2.3.2B R applies)1 refund all or part of that fee or levy.
1The FSA may not consider a claim under FEES 2.3.1 R and/or FEES 2.3.2 R to reduce, remit or refund any overpaid amounts paid by a fee payer in respect of a particular period, due to a mistake of fact or law by the fee payer, if the claim is made by the fee payer more than 2 years after the beginning of the period to which the overpayment relates.
Where a listed company or applicant appoints more than one sponsor , the company must:(1) ensure that one of the sponsors that is appointed:(a) takes primary responsibility for contact with the FSA in respect of the entire application or transaction; and(b) appoints a suitably experienced employee, whose name appears on the list described in LR 8.6.15 R to liaise with the FSA; and(2) inform the FSA, in writing, of the name and contact details of the sponsor taking responsibility
Individual guidance is guidance that is not given to persons or regulated persons generally or to a class of regulated person. It will normally be given to one particular person, which relates to its own particular circumstances or plans. It may be oral or written. Individual guidance will not be published but may at the FSA's discretion be converted to general guidance and published in the Handbook. Written individual guidance will often be labelled as such1
A person may need to ask the FSA for individual guidance on how the rules and general guidance in the Handbook, the Act or other regulatory requirements apply in their particular circumstances. This chapter describes how a person may do this. Section 157 of the Act gives the FSA the power to give guidance consisting of such information and advice as it considers appropriate.
The FSA may revoke a waiver at any time. In deciding whether to revoke a waiver, the FSA will consider whether the conditions in section 148(4) of the Act are no longer satisfied (see SUP 8.3.1 G), and whether the waiver is otherwise no longer appropriate. The FSA may revoke a waiver with immediate effect, if it considers that this is necessary, for example, in order to prevent undue risk to consumers.
If the FSA proposes to revoke a waiver, or revokes a waiver with immediate effect, it will:(1) give the firm written notice either of its proposal, or of its action, giving reasons;(2) state in the notice a reasonable period (usually 28 days) within which the firm can make representations about the proposal or action; if a firm wants to make oral representations, it should inform the FSA as quickly as possible , specify who will make the representations and which matters will
(1) The purpose of REC 3.13 is to enable the FSA to monitor any significant instances where UK recognised bodies outsource their functions to other persons (as they are permitted to dounder Regulation 6 of the Recognition Requirements Regulations. See REC 2.2).(2) The FSA does not need to be notified of every instance of outsourcing by a UK recognised body, but only where an activity or activities which form a significant part of a relevant function or which make a significant
Where a UK recognised body makes an offer or agrees to delegate any of its relevant functions to another person, it must immediately give the FSA notice of that event, and:(1) inform the FSA of the reasons for that delegation or proposed delegation;(2) inform the FSA of the reasons why it is satisfied that it will continue to meet the recognition requirements following that delegation;(3) where it makes such an offer by issuing a written invitation to tender to another body or
In the FSA's opinion, however, such information is likely to take on the nature of advice if the circumstances in which it is provided give it the force of a recommendation. Examples of situations where information provided by a person (P) might take the form of advice are given below.(1) P may provide information on a selected, rather than balanced and neutral, basis that would tend to influence the decision of a person. This may arise where P offers to provide information about
The potential for variation in the form, content and manner of pre-purchase questioning is considerable, but there are two broad types. The first type involves providing questions and answers which are confined to factual matters (for example, the amount of the cover). In the FSA's view, this does not itself amount to advising on contracts of insurance, if it involves the provision of information rather than advice. There are various possible scenarios, including the following:(1)
In the case of PERG 5.8.18G (2) and similar scenarios, the FSA considers that it is necessary to look at the process and outcome of pre-purchase questioning as a whole. It may be that the element of advice incorporated in the questioning can properly be viewed as generic advice if it were considered in isolation. But although the actual advice may be generic, the process has ended in identifying one or more particular contracts of insurance. The combination of the generic advice
This is explained in greater detail, together with the provisions on the granting of certificates by the FSA on the application of the proprietor of a periodical publication or news or information service or broadcast, in PERG 7 (Periodical publications, news services and broadcasts: applications for certification).
In assessing this threshold condition, factors which the FSA will take into consideration include, among other things, whether: (1) it is likely that the FSA will receive adequate information from the firm, and those persons with whom the firm has close links, to enable it to determine whether the firm is complying with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system and to identify and assess the impact on the regulatory objectives in section 2 of the Act (The FSA's
When a firm (whether on its own account or on behalf of another) enters into a reportable transaction (as defined in SUP 17.5), it must make a transaction report (as set out in SUP 17.6) to the FSA.
An investment management firm or
a personal investment firm need
not make a transaction
report to the FSA if: (1) the reportable
transaction is transacted on a regulated market and the firm:(a) reports the reportable transaction to that regulated market; or(b) satisfies itself that it will be so reported;
or(2) the firm is
the seller, or is acting on behalf of the seller, and the counterparty for
that transaction is another firm;
or(3) the firm has
reasonable grounds to believe
For the purposes of SUP 17.4.3 (3) 'reasonable grounds'
would include a firm relying
on a broker if:(1) the firm used
the same broker for transactions before commencement;(2) that broker was previously regulated by SFA and was subject to
its transaction reporting requirements; and(3) the firm is
not aware of any material changes to the broker's permission.
In
determining whether or not the conduct of an approved
person performing a significant
influence function under APER 4.6.5 E, APER 4.6.6 E and APER 4.6.8 E complies with Statement
of Principle 6 (see APER
2.1.2 P), the following are factors which, in
the opinion of the FSA, are to be taken into account:(1) the
competence, knowledge or seniority of the delegate; and (2) the
past performance and record of the delegate.
An approved person performing a significant influence function will not
always manage the business on a day-to-day basis himself. The extent to which
he does so will depend on a number of factors, including the nature, scale
and complexity of the business and his position within it. The larger and
more complex the business, the greater the need for clear and effective delegation
and reporting lines. The FSA will look to the approved person performing a significant
influence function
(1) An approved person performing a significant influence function may delegate
the investigation, resolution or management of an issue or authority for dealing
with a part of the business to individuals who report to him or to others.(2) The approved person performing a significant influence function should have
reasonable grounds for believing that the delegate has the competence, knowledge,
skill and time to deal with the issue. For instance, if the compliance department
only
The FSA, (for periodic fees, FOS and FSCS levies), FOS Ltd (for FOS case fees), expect to issue invoices at least 30 days before the date on which the relevant amounts fall due. FOS case fees are invoiced on a monthly basis. Accordingly it will generally be the case that a person will have at least 30 days from the issue of the invoice before an administrative fee becomes payable.2
Paragraph 17(4) of Schedule 1 and section 99(5) to the Act permit the FSA to recover fees ( and, where relevant, FOS levies), and section 213(6) permits the FSCS to recover shares of the FSCS levy payable, as a debt owed to the FSA and FSCS respectively, and the FSA and FSCS, as relevant, will consider taking action for recovery (including interest) through the civil courts. Also, the FOS Ltd (in respect of case fees) may take steps to recover any money owed to it (including
In addition, the FSA may be entitled to take regulatory action in relation to the non-payment of fees and FOS levies. FSA may also take regulatory action in relation to the non-payment of FOS case fees or share of the FSCS levy, after reference of the matter to FSA by FOS Ltd or FSCSrespectively. What action (if any) that is taken by the FSA will be decided upon in the light of the particular circumstances of the case.
(1) The report from a trustee of an AUT to the FSA must state, in relation to the manager of each AUT for which it is a trustee, the number of times during the quarter in which facts came to the firm's knowledge from which it appeared, or might have appeared, that the manager had failed (materially or otherwise) to: (a) give correct instructions to the trustee to create or cancel units in the AUT when the manager should have done so, and the error: (i) resulted in the creation