Related provisions for PERG 6.4.3
361 - 380 of 598 items.
Sections 292(3) and 292(4) state:
2Section 292(3) |
|
The requirements are that- |
|
(a) |
investors are afforded protection equivalent to that which they would be afforded if the body concerned were required to comply withrecognition requirements; |
(b) |
there are adequate procedures for dealing with a person who is unable, or likely to become unable, to meet his obligations in respect of one or more market contracts connected with the [ROIE] or [ROCH]; |
(c) |
the applicant is able and willing to co-operate with the[FSA] by the sharing of information and in other ways; and |
(d) |
adequate arrangements exist for co-operation between the[FSA] and those responsible for the supervision of the applicant in the country or territory in which the applicant's head office is situated. |
Section 292(4) |
|
In considering whether it is satisfied as to the requirements mentioned in subsections (3)(a) and (b), the[FSA] is to have regard to- |
|
(a) |
the relevant law and practice of the country or territory in which the applicant's head office is situated; |
(b) |
the rules and practices of the applicant. |
Firms are reminded of the client's best interests rule, which requires the firm to act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the best interests of their clients. An example of what is generally considered to be such conduct, in the context of stock lending activities involving retail clients is that:(1) the firm ensures that relevant collateral is provided by the borrower in favour of the client;(2) the current realisable value of the
financial instrument
and
Neither the Post BCCI Directive, MiFID,3 the Insurance Mediation Directive nor the Act define what is meant by a firm's 'head office'. This is not necessarily the firm's place of incorporation or the place where its business is wholly or mainly carried on. Although the FSA will judge each application on a case-by-case basis, the key issue in identifying the head office of a firm is the location of its central management and control, that is, the location of: 1(1) the directors
If it appears to the FSA that an actuary1 has failed to comply with a duty imposed on him under the Act, it may disqualify him under section 345 of the Act. For more detail about what happens when the disqualification of an actuary is being considered or put into effect, see EG 155 (Disqualification of auditors and actuaries)1. A list of actuaries who are disqualified by the FSA may be found on the FSA website (www.fsa.gov.uk).15
(1) For the purposes of the standard terms, a company, partnership, individual practitioner or other business, whether authorised or unauthorised, agreeing to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service is known as a VJ participant.(2) In consequence of the agreement by the VJ participant to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction, the standard terms fix the basis on which complaints relating to relevant acts or omissions of the VJ participant
The purpose of this appendix is to describe how FOS Ltd must handle relevant existing complaints (that is, the partly completed complaints which it inherits from the former schemes at commencement under the Ombudsman Transitional Order). Complaints which firms (as opposed to the former schemes) have partly completed at commencement will be handled as described in DISP 1 (Complaint handling procedures for firms) (see, in particular, DISP 1.4.6 R).
(1) The authorised fund manager may, with the prior agreement of the depositary, and must without delay, if the depositary so requires, suspend the issue, cancellation, sale and redemption of units in an authorised fund (referred to in this chapter as "dealings in units"), where due to exceptional circumstances it is in the interest of all the unitholders in the authorised fund. (2) On suspension, the authorised fund manager, or the depositary if it has required the authorised
This manual applies in the following way:(1) FEES 1, 2 and 3 apply to:(a) every applicant for Part IV permission (including an incoming firm applying for top-up permission);(b) every Treaty firm that wishes to exercise a Treaty right to qualify for authorisation under Schedule 4 to the Act (Treaty rights), except those providing cross border services only,2 in respect of regulated activities for which it does not have an EEA right; (c) every applicant for a certificate under article
(1) The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the Act) is the UK legislation under which bodies corporate, partnerships, individuals and unincorporated associations are permitted by the FSA to carry on various financial activities which are subject to regulation (referred to as regulated activities).(2) The activities which are regulated activities are specified in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (the Regulated Activities Order):
PERG 1.4.1 G (General guidance to be found in PERG) summarises the general guidance contained in PERG. Readers should note that in a cross-reference, as explained in paragraph 40 of the Readers' Guide, the code letters of the manual or sourcebook immediately precede the chapter number. For example, PERG 1 is the first chapter of the Perimeter Guidance manual. PERG 1.5 provides details of and links to other general guidance on perimeter issues that is available on the FSA webs
(1) Notification of suspicious transactions to the FSA requires sufficient indications (which may not be apparent until after the transaction has taken place) that the transaction might constitute market abuse. In particular a firm will need to be able to explain the basis for its suspicion when notifying the FSA (see SUP 15.10 R). Certain transactions by themselves may seem completely devoid of anything suspicious, but might deliver such indications of possible market abuse,
An investment firm or a credit institution making a notification to the FSA under this section may do so:(1) by mail to:Market Conduct Team25 The North ColonnadeCanary WharfLondon E14 5HS; or(2) by electronic mail to market.abuse@fsa.gov.uk;(3) by facsimile to the Market Conduct Team on 020 7066 1099; or(4) by telephone to the market abuse helpline 020 7066 4900. [Note: Article 10 2004/72/EC]
4It is the responsibility of an insurance intermediary's senior management to determine, on a continuing basis, whether the insurance intermediary is an exempt insurance intermediary and to appoint an auditor if management determines the firm is no longer exempt. SUP 3.7 (amplified by SUP 15) sets out what a firm should consider when deciding whether it should notify the FSA of matters raised by its auditor.6
4The rights and duties of auditors are set out in SUP 3.8 (Rights and duties of all auditors) and SUP 3.10 (Duties of auditors: notification and report on client assets). SUP 3.8.10 G includes the auditor's statutory duty to report certain matters to the FSA imposed by regulations made by the Treasury under sections 342(5) and 343(5) of the Act (information given by auditor or actuary to the FSA). An auditor should bear these rights and duties in mind when carrying out client
If it appears to the FSA that an appropriate actuary has failed to comply with a duty imposed on him under the Act, it may disqualify him under section 345 of the Act. For more detail about what happens when the disqualification of an actuary is being considered or put into effect, see EG 153 (Disqualification of auditors and actuaries)2. A list of actuaries who have been disqualified by the FSA may be found on the FSA website (www.fsa.gov.uk).3
The FSA will consider all the relevant circumstances of the case when deciding whether to impose a penalty or issue a public censure. As such, the factors set out in DEPP 6.4.2 G are not exhaustive. Not all of the factors may be relevant in a particular case and there may be other factors, not listed, that are relevant.
The criteria for determining whether it is appropriate to issue a public censure rather than impose a financial penalty are similar to those for determining the amount of penalty set out in DEPP 6.5. Some particular considerations that may be relevant when the FSA determines whether to issue a public censure rather than impose a financial penalty are:(1) whether or not deterrence may be effectively achieved by issuing a public censure;(2) if the person has made a profit or avoided
An applicant for the admission of securitised derivatives must either:(1) have permission under the Act to carry on its activities relating to securitised derivatives and be either a bank or a securities and futures firm;(2) if the applicant is an overseas company:(a) be regulated by an overseas regulator responsible for the regulation of banks, securities firms or futures firms and which has a lead regulation agreement for financial supervision with the FSA; and(b) be carrying
The following factors may be relevant to determining the appropriate level of financial penalty to be imposed on a person under the Act:(1) DeterrenceWhen determining the appropriate level of penalty, the FSA will have regard to the principal purpose for which it imposes sanctions, namely to promote high standards of regulatory and/or market conduct by deterring persons who have committed breaches from committing further breaches and helping to deter other persons from committing
If an unauthorised administrator makes arrangements for a mortgage administrator to administer its regulated mortgage contracts, the exclusion may cease to be available because the mortgage administrator ceases to have the required permission, or because the arrangement is terminated. The exclusion gives the unauthorised administrator a one-month grace period during which it may administer the contracts itself. If the period of administration exceeds one month, the unauthorised
Under article 63 of the Regulated Activities Order, a person who is not an authorised person does not administer a regulated mortgage contract if he administers the contract under an agreement with a firm with permission to administer a regulated mortgage contract. A firm with permission to administer a regulated mortgage contract may thus outsource or delegate the administration function to an unauthorised third party. A firm that proposes to do this should however note, as set
In determining whether a UK recognised body has effective arrangements for the investigation and resolution of complaints arising in connection with the performance of, or failure to perform, any of its regulatory functions, the FSA may have regard to the extent to which the UK recognised body's resources and procedures enable it to:(1) acknowledge complaints promptly;(2) make an objective, prompt and thorough initial investigation of complaints;(3) provide a timely reply to the
In determining whether a UK recognised body's arrangements for the investigation of complaints include appropriate arrangements for the complaint to be fairly and impartially investigated by an independent person (a "complaints investigator"), the FSA may have regard to:(1) the arrangements made for appointing (and removing) a complaints investigator, including the terms and conditions of such an appointment and the provision for remuneration of a complaints investigator; (2)