Related provisions for BIPRU 7.4.15
Table: Example of the reduced net underwriting position calculation
This table belongs to BIPRU 7.8.29G
Time |
Percentage reduction (see BIPRU 7.8.28R) |
||||
At initial commitment 9.00am Monday |
£100m gross amount is reduced by £20m due to sales/sub-underwriting commitments confirmed in writing at the time of initial commitment (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (1)) and (4)). |
= |
£80m |
90% |
£8m |
Post initial commitment 9.02am Monday |
Remaining £80m is reduced by £40m due to further sales, sub-underwriting commitments obtained and allocations granted (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (2) - (5)). |
= |
£40m |
90% |
£4m |
At the end of working day 1 |
Remaining £40m is reduced to £20m due to further sales. |
= |
£20m |
90% |
£2m |
End of working day 3 |
Remaining £20m is reduced to £5m due to further sales. |
= |
£5m |
75% |
£1.25 m |
End of working day 4 |
Remaining £5m is reduced to £2m due to further sales. |
= |
£2m |
50% |
£1m |
End of working day 5 |
Remaining £2m is reduced to £1m due to further sales. |
= |
£1m |
25% |
£0.75 m |
Start of working day 6 |
£1m remaining |
= |
£1m |
0% |
£1m |
Table: This table belongs to COLL 6.3.2 G (2) (a) and COLL 6.3.3 R (Valuation)1.
Valuation and pricing |
||
1 |
The valuation of scheme property |
|
(1) |
Where possible, investments should be valued using a reputable source. The reliability of the source of prices should be kept under regular review. |
|
(2) |
For some or all of the investments comprising the scheme property, different prices may quoted according to whether they are being bought (offer prices) or sold (bid prices). The valuation of a single-priced authorised fund should reflect the mid-market value of such investments. In the case of a dual-priced authorised fund, the issue basis of the valuation will be carried out by reference to the offer prices of investments and the cancellation basis by reference to the bid prices of those same investments. The prospectus should explain how investments will be valued for which a single price is quoted for both buying and selling.1 1 |
|
3(2A) |
Schemes investing in approved money-market instruments5should value such instruments on an amortised cost basis on condition that:5
|
|
[Note:CESR's UCITS eligible assets guidelines with respect to article 4(2) of the UCITS eligible assets Directive] |
||
(3) |
Any part of the scheme property of an authorised fund that is not an investment should be valued at a fair value, but for immovables this is subject to COLL 5.6.20 R (3) (f) (Standing independent valuer and valuation). |
|
(4) |
For the purposes of (2) and (3), any fiscal charges, commissions, professional fees or other charges that were paid, or would be payable on acquiring or disposing of the investment or other part of the scheme property should, in the case of a single-priced authorised fund,2 be excluded from the value of an investment or other part of the scheme property. In the case of a dual-priced authorised fund, any such payments should be added to the issue basis of the valuation, or subtracted from the cancellation basis of the valuation, as appropriate. Alternatively, the prospectus of a dual-priced authorised fund may prescribe any other method of calculating unitprices that ensures an equivalent treatment of the effect of these payments.2 |
|
(5) |
Where the authorised fund manager has reasonable grounds to believe that:
|
|
(6) |
The circumstances which may give rise to a fair value price being used include:
|
|
(7) |
In determining whether to use such a fair value price , the authorised fund manager should include in his consideration:
|
|
(8) |
The authorised fund manager should document the basis of valuation (including any fair value pricing policy) and, where appropriate, the basis of any methodology and ensure that the procedures are applied consistently and fairly. |
|
(9) |
Where a unit price is determined using properly applied fair value prices in accordance with policies in (8), subsequent information that indicates the price should have been different from that calculated will not normally give rise to an instance of incorrect pricing. |
|
2 |
The pricing controls of the authorised fund manager |
|
(1) |
An authorised fund manager needs to be able to demonstrate that it has effective controls over its calculations of unit prices. |
|
(2) |
The controls referred to in (1) should ensure that:
|
|
(3) |
In exercising its pricing controls, the authorised fund manager may exercise reasonable discretion in determining the appropriate frequency of the operation of the controls and may choose a longer interval, if appropriate, given the level of activity on the authorised fund1or the materiality of any effect on the price. |
|
(4) |
Evidence of the exercise of the pricing controls should be retained. |
|
(5) |
Evidence of persistent or repetitive errors in relation to these matters, and in particular any evidence of a pattern of errors working in an authorised fund manager's favour, will make demonstrating effective controls more difficult. |
|
(6) |
Where the pricing1function is delegated to a third party, COLL 6.6.15 R (1) (Committees and delegation) will apply. |
|
3 |
The depositary's review of the authorised fund manager's systems and controls |
|
(1) |
This section provides details of the types of checks a depositary should carry out to be satisfied that the authorised fund manager adopts systems and controls which are appropriate to ensure that prices of units are calculated in accordance with this section and to ensure that the likelihood of incorrect prices will be minimised. These checks also apply where an authorised fund manager has delegated all or some of its pricing1 functions to one or more third parties5. 5 |
|
(2) |
A depositary should thoroughly review an authorised fund manager's systems and controls to confirm that they are satisfactory. The depositary's review should include an analysis of the controls in place to determine the extent to which reliance can be placed on them. |
|
(3) |
A review should be performed when the depositary is appointed and thereafter as it feels appropriate given its knowledge of the robustness and the stability of the systems and controls and their operation. |
|
(4) |
A review should be carried out more frequently where a depositary knows or suspects that an authorised fund manager's systems and controls are weak or are otherwise unsatisfactory. |
|
(5) |
Additionally, a depositary should from time to time review other aspects of the valuation of the scheme property of each authorised fund for which it is responsible, verifying, on a sample basis, if necessary, the assets, liabilities, accruals, units in issue1, securities prices (and in particular the prices of OTC derivatives,5unapproved securities and the basis for the valuation of unquoted securities) and any other relevant matters, for example an accumulation factor or a currency conversion factor. |
|
(6) |
A depositary should ensure that any issues, which are identified in any such review, are properly followed up and resolved. |
|
4 |
The recording and reporting of instances of incorrect pricing |
|
(1) |
An authorised fund manager should record each instance where the price of a unit is incorrect as soon as the error is discovered, and report the fact to the depositary together with details of the action taken, or to be taken, to avoid repetition as soon as practicable. |
|
(2) |
In accordance with COLL 6.6.11 G (Duty to inform the FSA), the depositary should report any breach of the rules in COLL 6.3 immediately to the FSA. However, notification should relate to instances which the depositary considers material only. |
|
(3) |
A depositary should also report to the FSA immediately any instance of incorrect pricing1where the error is 0.5% or more of the price of a unit, where a depositary believes that reimbursement or payment is inappropriate and should not be paid by an authorised fund manager. |
|
(4) |
In accordance with SUP 16.6.8 R, a depositary should also make a return to the FSA on a quarterly basis which summarises the number of instances of incorrect pricing1 during a particular period. |
|
5 |
The rectification of pricing breaches |
|
(1) |
COLL 6.6.3 R (1) (Functions of the authorised fund manager) places a duty on the authorised fund manager to take action to reimburse affected unitholders, former unitholders, and the scheme itself, for instances of incorrect pricing1, except if it appears to the depositary that the breach is of minimal significance. |
|
(2) |
A depositary may consider that the instance of incorrect pricing1is of minimal significance if:
|
|
(3) |
In determining (2), if the instance of incorrect pricing1 is due to one or more factors or exists over a period of time, each price should be considered separately. |
|
(4) |
If a depositary deems it appropriate, it may, in spite of the circumstances outlined in (2), require a payment from the authorised fund manager or from the authorised fund to the unitholders, former unitholders, the authorised fund or the authorised fund manager (where appropriate). |
|
(5) |
The depositary should satisfy itself that any payments required following an instance of incorrect pricing1 are accurately and promptly calculated and paid. |
|
(6) |
If a depositary considers that reimbursement or payment is inappropriate, it should report the matter to the FSA, together with its recommendation and justification. The depositary should take into account the need to avoid prejudice to the rights of unitholders, or the rights of unitholders in a class of units. |
|
(7) |
It may not be practicable, or in some cases legally permissible, for the authorised fund manager to obtain reimbursement from unitholders, where the unitholders have benefited from the incorrect price. |
|
(8) |
In all cases where reimbursement or payment is required, amounts due to be reimbursed to unitholders for individual sums which are reasonably considered by the authorised fund manager and depositary to be immaterial, need not normally be paid. |