Related provisions for BIPRU 4.2.14

1 - 11 of 11 items.

Search Term(s)

Filter by Topics

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

BIPRU 4.3.19RRP
A firm must document the design and operational details of its rating systems. The documentation must evidence compliance with the minimum IRB standards and the firm'sIRB permission, and address topics including portfolio differentiation, rating criteria, responsibilities of parties that rate obligors and exposures, frequency of assignment reviews, and management oversight of the rating process.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 31]
BIPRU 4.3.20RRP
A firm must ensure that all documentation relating to its rating systems or otherwise required by the rules governing the IRB approach are stored, arranged and indexed in such a way that the firm would be able to make them all available to the FSA, or to make any class or description of them specified by the FSA available to the FSA, immediately on demand or within a short time thereafter.
BIPRU 4.3.25RRP
A rating system comprises all of the methods, processes, controls, data collection and IT systems that support the assessment of credit risk, the assignment of exposures to grades or pools (rating), and the quantification of default and loss estimates for a certain type of exposure.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 1]
BIPRU 4.3.29RRP
A firm must have robust systems in place to validate the accuracy and consistency of rating systems, processes, and the estimation of all relevant risk parameters (PD, LGD, conversion factors and EL). A firm must be able to demonstrate to the FSA that the internal validation process enables it to assess the performance of internal rating and risk estimation systems consistently and meaningfully.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 110]
BIPRU 4.3.30RRP
(1) A firm must validate its rating systems. Its validation process must include, as a minimum, the elements set out in (2) - (8).(2) A firm must establish and define standards of objectivity, accuracy, stability and conservatism that it designs its ratings systems to meet. It must have processes that establish whether its rating systems meet those standards.(3) A firm must establish and define standards of accuracy of calibration (i.e. whether outcomes are consistent with estimate)
BIPRU 4.3.38RRP
Internal audit or another comparable independent auditing unit must review at least annually the firm'srating systems and its operations, including the operations of the firm and the estimation of PDs, LGDs, ELs and conversion factors. Areas of review must include adherence to all applicable minimum requirements.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 131]
BIPRU 4.3.51RRP
(1) This paragraph applies to the use of statistical models and/or other mechanical methods to assign exposures to obligor grades, obligor pools, facility grades or facility pools.(2) A firm must be able to demonstrate to the FSA that the model has good predictive power and that capital requirements are not distorted as a result of its use.(3) The input variables to the model must form a reasonable and effective basis for the resulting predictions. The model must not have material
BIPRU 4.3.87GRP
A firm should be able to demonstrate to the FSA:(1) how, with respect to each rating system, both assignment of ratings and estimates of PD, LGD and conversion factors are affected by:(a) movements in the economic cycle; and(b) other cyclical effects which are material to levels of default, loss or the amount of exposures at default for the exposures covered by the rating system; and(2) the level of conservatism inherent in its ratings, as provided for by BIPRU.
BIPRU 4.3.89GRP
Estimation of PD through the use of a technique set out in BIPRU does not remove the need to make conservative adjustments, where necessary, related to the expected range of estimation errors so that capital requirements produced by the relevant model or other rating system are not understated.
BIPRU 4.3.95RRP
(1) If:(a) a firm's internal experience of exposures of a type covered by a model or other rating system is 20 defaults or fewer; and(b) in the firm's view, reliable estimates of PD cannot be derived from external sources of default data, including the use of market price related data, for all the exposures covered by the rating system;the firm must estimate PD for exposures covered by that rating system in accordance with this rule.(2) A firm must use a statistical technique
BIPRU 4.3.96GRP
A firm may if appropriate also choose to use the approach in BIPRU 4.3.91 G if the internal experience on exposures covered by a rating system is greater than 20 defaults.
BIPRU 4.3.103RRP
A firm must use LGD estimates that are appropriate for an economic downturn if those are more conservative than the long-run average. To the extent a rating system is expected to deliver constant realised LGDs by grade or pool over time, a firm must make adjustments to its estimates of risk parameters by grade or pool to limit the capital impact of an economic downturn.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 74]
BIPRU 4.3.127RRP
A firm must use conversion factor estimates that are appropriate for an economic downturn if those are more conservative than the long-run average. To the extent a rating system is expected to deliver realised conversion factors at a constant level by grade or pool over time, a firm must make adjustments to its estimates of risk parameters by grade or pool to limit the capital impact of an economic downturn.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 88]
BIPRU 4.4.7RRP
A rating system must have an obligor rating scale which reflects exclusively quantification of the risk of obligor default. The obligor rating scale must have a minimum of seven grades for non-defaulted obligors and one for defaulted obligors.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 6]
BIPRU 4.4.8RRP
An obligor grade means for the purpose of BIPRU 4 as it applies to the sovereign, institution and corporate IRB exposure class a risk category within a rating system's obligor rating scale, to which obligors are assigned on the basis of a specified and distinct set of rating criteria, from which estimates of PD are derived. A firm must document both the relationship between obligor grades in terms of the level of default risk each grade implies and the criteria used to distinguish
BIPRU 4.4.21RRP
In addition to complying with the material in BIPRU 4.3.54 R (Data maintenance) a firm must collect and store:(1) complete rating histories on obligors and recognised guarantors;(2) the dates the ratings were assigned;(3) the key data and methodology used to derive the rating;(4) the person responsible for the rating assignment;(5) the identity of obligors and exposures that defaulted;(6) the date and circumstances of such defaults;(7) data on the PDs and realised default rates
BIPRU 4.4.27RRP
To the extent that a firm uses data on internal default experience for the estimation of PDs it must be able to demonstrate in its analysis that the estimates are reflective of underwriting standards and of any differences in the rating system that generated the data and the current rating system. Where underwriting standards or rating systems have changed, a firm must add a greater margin of conservatism in its estimate of PD.[Note:BCD Annex VII Part 4 point 63]
BIPRU 4.4.48RRP
[to follow]
BIPRU 4.4.49RRP
[to follow]
BIPRU 4.2.2RRP
A firm's systems for the management and rating of credit risk exposures must be sound and implemented with integrity and, in particular, they must meet the following standards in accordance with the minimum IRB standards:(1) the firm'srating systems provide for a meaningful assessment of obligor and transaction characteristics, a meaningful differentiation of risk and accurate and consistent quantitative estimates of risk;(2) internal ratings and default and loss estimates used
BIPRU 4.2.5GRP
(1) This paragraph provides guidance on BIPRU 4.2.2 R and in particular BIPRU 4.2.2 R (1).(2) The information that a firm produces or uses for the purpose of the IRB approach should be reliable and take proper account of the different users of the information produced (customers, shareholders, regulators and other market participants).(3) A firm should establish quantified and documented targets and standards, against which it should test the accuracy of data used in its rating
BIPRU 4.2.8GRP
This paragraph provides further guidance on BIPRU 4.2.2 R and in particular BIPRU 4.2.2 R (2). In the FSA's view risk management has an essential role in informing risk decisions. However, an essential role does not necessarily mean an exclusive role or even always a primary role. There may be justifiable differences between the IRB approach and the firm's use of rating systems for its internal purposes as referred to in BIPRU 4.2.2 R (2). For example, internal standards and policies
BIPRU 4.2.11RRP
A firm must be able to demonstrate that it has been using for the IRB exposure classes in question rating systems that were broadly in line with the minimum IRB standards for internal risk measurement and management purposes for at least three years prior to the date of its IRB permission.[Note:BCD Article 84(3)]
BIPRU 4.2.26RRP
(1) To the extent that its IRB permission permits this, a firm permitted to use the IRB approach in the calculation of risk weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts3 for one or more IRB exposure classes may apply the standardised approach in accordance with this rule.3(2) A firm may apply the standardised approach to the IRB exposure class referred to in BIPRU 4.3.2 R (1) (Sovereigns) where the number of material counterparties is limited and it would be unduly burdensome
BIPRU 4.1.14GRP
(1) The FSA will only grant an IRB permission if it is satisfied that the firm's systems for the management and rating of credit risk exposures are sound and implemented with integrity and, in particular, that they meet the standards in BIPRU 4.2.2 R in accordance with the minimum IRB standards.(2) Under BIPRU 4.2.11 R, a firm applying for an IRB permission is required to demonstrate that it has been using for the IRB exposure classes in question rating systems that were broadly
BIPRU 4.1.24GRP
An IRB permission will set out firm-specific material. This will generally include:(1) details about the firm's methodology for carrying out the IRB approach, including the models and rating systems that a firm should use;(2) reporting requirements; and(3) requirements about internal control structure.
BIPRU 4.6.18RRP
In addition to complying with BIPRU 4.3.54 R (Data maintenance) a firm must collect and store:(1) data used in the process of allocating exposures to grades or pools;(2) data on the estimated PDs, LGDs and conversion factors associated with grades or pools of exposures;(3) the identity of obligors and exposures that defaulted;(4) for defaultedexposures, data on the grades or pools to which the exposure was assigned over the year prior to default and the realised outcomes on LGD
BIPRU 4.5.11GRP
(1) If a firm applies for an IRB permission or for a variation of an IRB permission that permits the treatment in BIPRU 4.5.10 R it should demonstrate that its standards exceed those of the slotting criteria provided for in BIPRU 4.5 and result in ratings that are stronger than the benchmarks referred to in (3).(2) If a firm has an IRB permission that permits the treatment in BIPRU 4.5.10 R it should continue to be able to demonstrate the matters in (1) to the FSA if asked.(3)
BIPRU 11.6.1RRP
A firm calculating risk weighted exposure amounts in accordance with the IRB approach must disclose the following information:(1) the scope of the firm'sIRB permission;(2) an explanation and review of:(a) the structure of internal rating systems and relation between internal and external ratings;(b) the use of internal estimates other than for calculating risk weighted exposure amounts in accordance with the IRB approach;(c) the process for managing and recognising credit risk
FEES 3.2.7RRP

Table of application, notification and vetting fees

(1) Fee payer

(2) Fee payable

Due date

(a) Any applicant for Part IV permission (including an incoming firm applying for top-up permission)

(1) Unless (2) applies, in1 respect of a particular application, the highest of the tariffs set out in FEES 3 Annex 1 part 11 which apply to that application.

(2) In respect of a particular application which is:

(i) a straightforward or moderately complex case for the purposes of FEES 3 Annex 1 part 1, and

(ii) only involves a simple change of legal status as set out in FEES 3 Annex 1 part 6,

the fee payable is 50% of the tariff that would otherwise be payable in FEES 3 Annex 1 part 11

1

On or before the application is made

(b) Any Treaty firm that wishes to exercise a Treaty right to qualify for authorisation under Schedule 4 to the Act (Treaty rights) in respect of regulated activities for which it does not have an EEA right, except for a firm providing cross border services only4

(1) Where no certificate has been issued under paragraph 3(4) of Schedule 4 to the Act the fee payable is, in respect of a particular exercise, set out in FEES 3 Annex 1, part 4

(2) Where a certificate in (i) has been issued no fee is payable

On or before the notice of exercise is given

(c) Any applicant for a certificate under article 54 of the Regulated Activities Order

2,000

On or before the application is made

(d) Applicants for an authorisation order for, or recognition of, a collective investment scheme

FEES 3 Annex 2, part 1

On or before the application is made

(f) Any person seeking an order under section 326(1) of the Act to become a designated professional body.

10,000

30 days after the order is granted

(g) Any applicant for recognition as a UK recognised body under section 287 or section 288 of the Act

FEES 3 Annex 3, part 1

On or before the date the application is made

(h) Any applicant for recognition as an overseas recognised body under section 287 or section 288 and section 292 of the Act

FEES 3 Annex 3, part 2

On or before the date the application is made

(i) An applicant for listing (under the listing rules)

FEES 3 Annex 4, part 1

On or before the date the application is made

(j) Applicant for approval as sponsor (under the listing rules)

FEES 3 Annex 4, part 2

On or before the date the application is made

(k) Issuers of tranches from debt issuance programmes and securitised derivative tranches

FEES 3 Annex 4, part 1

An upfront fee is required per tranche for draw downs in the following 12 months

(l) Under the listing rules, an issuer involved in specific events or transactions during the year where documentation is subject to a transaction vetting

FEES 3 Annex 5, part 1, unless the transaction would come within the definition of significant transaction under category (q) in this table, in which case the fee payable under that category.2

On or before the date that relevant documentation is first submitted to the FSA

(m) Under the prospectus rules, an issuer or person requesting approval or vetting of the documents arising in relation to specific events or transactions that it might be involved in during the year

FEES 3 Annex 5, part 2, unless the transaction would come within the definition of significant transaction under category (q) in this table, in which case the fee payable under that category.2

On or before the date that relevant documentation is first submitted to the FSA

(n) Applicants to be added to the list of designated investment exchanges

50,000

On or before the date the application is made

2(o) In connection with rules (or future rules) implementing the Capital Requirements Regulations 2006 (including any amendments):

(i) a firm applying to the FSA for a waiver or concession (or guidance on the availability of either): or

(ii) a firm'sEEA parent applying to its Home State regulator for the use of the Internal Ratings Based approach and the Home State regulator requesting the FSA's assistance in accordance with the Capital Requirements Regulations 2006 .

112

If the firm is applying to the FSA:2

(1) unless2 (2) applies, FEES 3 Annex 6;2

(2) (a) unless2 (b) applies a1firm submitting a second application for a waiver or concession or1guidance described in column (1) within 12 months of the first application (where the fee was paid in accordance with (1)) must pay 50% of the fee applicable to it under FEES 3 Annex 6, but only in respect of that second application

(b) No fee is payable by a firm in relation to a successful application for a waiver or a concession based on a minded to grant decision in respect of the same matter following a complete application for guidance in accordance with prescribed submission requirements.1

(c) No fee is payable by a firm applying to its Home State regulator where the Home State regulator has requested the assistance of the FSAand the firm falls within Group 4 of Part 1 of FEES 3 Annex 6.2

212

Where the firm has made an application directly to the FSA, on or before the date the application is made, otherwise within 30 days after the FSA notifies the firm that its EEA parent's Home State regulator has requested the FSA's assistance.2

2

(p) A firm applying for a variation of its Part IV permission

(1) Unless (2) applies, if the proposed new1 business of the firm would1 fall within one or more activity groups specified in Part 1 of FEES 4 Annex 1 not applicable before the application1, the fee is 50% of the highest of the tariffs set out in which apply to that application.

(2) If the only change is that the1 A.12 activity group tariff applied to the firm's business before the variation and the A.13 activity group will apply after variation, no fee is payable(3) In all other cases, other than applications by credit unions, the fee payable is 250, unless the variation involves only the reduction (and no other increases) in the scope of a Part IV permission in which case no fee is payable.1

11

On or before the date the application is made

2(q) A significanttransaction, being one where:

(i) the issuer has a market capitalisation in excess of 1.5 billion and it is a new applicant for a primary listing under the listing rules, or involved in a reverse or hostile takeover or a significant restructuring; or

(ii) the issuer has a market capitalisation in excess of 5 billion and is involved in a class 1 transaction or a transaction requiring vetting of an equity prospectus or equivalent document

; or (iii) the issuer is proposing a Depositary Receipt issue intended to raise more than 5billion.

50,000

On or before the date that the relevant documentation is first submitted to the FSA.3

33

2(r) Providers of reporting or trade matching systems applying for recognition under MiFID as an Approved Reporting Mechanism.

20,000

On or before the date the application is made.
BIPRU 8.8.9GRP
The governance arrangements that apply to the governing body, the senior management and any designated committee of a firm in relation to the IRB approach or the AMA also apply to the body or persons with equivalent powers with respect to the UK consolidation group or non-EEA sub-group. Where the parent undertaking and its subsidiary undertakings use rating systems on a unified basis, the approval and reporting process described in BIPRU 4.3.12 G (Approval and reporting arrangements