Related provisions for TC 2.1.2

61 - 80 of 108 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).

SYSC 4.4.6GRP

Frequently asked questions about allocation of functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R

Question

Answer

1

Does an individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R need to be an approved person?

An individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R will be performing the apportionment and oversight function (CF 8, see SUP 10.7.1 R) and an application must be made to the FSA for approval of the individual before the function is performed under section 59 of the Act (Approval for particular arrangements). There are exceptions from this in SUP 10.1 (Approved persons - Application).

2

If the allocation is to more than one individual, can they perform the functions, or aspects of the functions, separately?

If the functions are allocated to joint chief executives under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, they are expected to act jointly. If the functions are allocated to an individual under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, in addition to individuals under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, the former may normally be expected to perform a leading role in relation to the functions that reflects his position. Otherwise, yes.

3

What is meant by "appropriately allocate" in this context?

The allocation of functions should be compatible with delivering compliance with Principle 3, SYSC 4.4.3 R and SYSC 4.1.1 R. The FSA considers that allocation to one or two individuals is likely to be appropriate for most firms.

4

If a committee of management governs a firm or group, can the functions be allocated to every member of that committee?

Yes, as long as the allocation remains appropriate (see Question 3). If the firm also has an individual as chief executive, then the functions must be allocated to that individual as well under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see Question 7).

5

Does the definition of chief executive include the possessor of equivalent responsibilities with another title, such as a managing director or managing partner?

Yes.

6

Is it possible for a firm to have more than one individual as its chief executive?

Although unusual, some firms may wish the responsibility of a chief executive to be held jointly by more than one individual. In that case, each of them will be a chief executive and the functions must be allocated to all of them under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see also Questions 2 and 7).

7

If a firm has an individual as chief executive, must the functions be allocated to that individual?

Normally, yes, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

But if the firm is a body corporate and a member of a group, the functions may, instead of being allocated to the firm'schief executive, be allocated to a director or senior manager from the group responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division, so long as this is appropriate (see Question 3). Such individuals will nevertheless require approval by the FSA (see Question 1).

If the firm chooses to allocate the functions to a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of a relevant group division, the FSA would expect that individual to be of a seniority equivalent to or greater than a chief executive of the firm for the allocation to be appropriate.

See also Question 14.

8

If a firm has a chief executive, can the functions be allocated to other individuals in addition to the chief executive?

Yes. SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, permits a firm to allocate the functions, additionally, to the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers as long as this is appropriate (see Question 3).

9

What if a firm does not have a chief executive?

Normally, the functions must be allocated to one or more individuals selected from the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3.

But if the firm:

(1) is a body corporate and a member of a group; and

(2) the group has a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division;

then the functions must be allocated to that individual (together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate) under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

10

What do you mean by "group division within which some or all of the firm's regulated activities fall"?

A "division" in this context should be interpreted by reference to geographical operations, product lines or any other method by which the group's business is divided.

If the firm's regulated activities fall within more than one division and the firm does not wish to allocate the functions to its chief executive, the allocation must, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, be to:

(1) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group; or (2) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of one of those divisions;

together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate. (See also Questions 7 and 9.)

11

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an overseas firm which is not an incoming EEA firm, incoming Treaty firm or UCITS qualifier?

The firm must appropriately allocate those functions to one or more individuals, in accordance with SYSC 4.4.5 R, but:

(1) The responsibilities that must be apportioned and the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to activities carried on from a UK establishment with certain exceptions (see

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R). Note that SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.10R does not extend the territorial scope of SYSC 4.4 for an overseas firm.

(2) The chief executive of an overseas firm is the person responsible for the conduct of the firm's business within the United Kingdom (see the definition of "chief executive"). This might, for example, be the manager of the firm'sUK establishment, or it might be the chief executive of the firm as a whole, if he has that responsibility.

The apportionment and oversight function applies to such a firm, unless it falls within a particular exception from the approved persons regime (see Question 1).

12

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an incoming EEA firm or incoming Treaty firm?

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.1R(2) and SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R restrict the application of SYSC 4.4.5 R for such a firm. Accordingly:

(1) Such a firm is not required to allocate the function of dealing with apportionment in SYSC 4.4.5R (1).

(2) Such a firm is required to allocate the function of oversight in SYSC 4.4.5R (2). However, the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to matters which the FSA, as Host State regulator, is entitled to regulate (there is guidance on this in SUP 13A Annex 2). Those are primarily, but not exclusively, the systems and controls relating to the conduct of the firm's activities carried on from its UK branch.

(3) Such a firm need not allocate the function of oversight to its chief executive; it must allocate it to one or more directors and senior managers of the firm or the firm'sgroup under SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (2).

(4) An incoming EEA firm which has provision only for cross border services is not required to allocate either function if it does not carry on regulated activities in the United Kingdom; for example if they fall within the overseas persons exclusions in article 72 of the Regulated Activities Order.

See also Questions 1 and 15.

13

What about a firm that is a partnership or a limited liability partnership?

The FSA envisages that most if not all partners or members will be either directors or senior managers, but this will depend on the constitution of the partnership (particularly in the case of a limited partnership) or limited liability partnership. A partnership or limited liability partnership may also have a chief executive (see Question 5). A limited liability partnership is a body corporate and, if a member of a group, will fall within SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (1) or (2).

14

What if generally accepted principles of good corporate governance recommend that the chief executive should not be involved in an aspect of corporate governance?

The Note to SYSC 4.4.5 R provides that the chief executive or other executive director or senior manager need not be involved in such circumstances. For example, the Combined Code developed by the Committee on Corporate Governance recommends that the board of a listed company should establish an audit committee of non-executive directors to be responsible for oversight of the audit. That aspect of the oversight function may therefore be allocated to the members of such a committee without involving the chief executive. Such individuals may require approval by the FSA in relation to that function (see Question 1).

15

What about incoming electronic commerce activities carried on from an establishment in another EEA State with or for a person in the United Kingdom?

SYSC does not apply to an incoming ECA provider acting as such.
SUP 3.6.8GRP
In complying with SUP 3.6.1 R, a firm should take reasonable steps to ensure that all its employees cooperate with its auditor in the discharge of his duties under this chapter.
DISP 3.3.4RRP
The Ombudsman may dismiss a complaint without considering its merits if he considers that:(1) the complainant has not suffered (or is unlikely to suffer) financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience; or(2) the complaint is frivolous or vexatious; or(3) the complaint clearly does not have any reasonable prospect of success; or(4) the respondent has already made an offer of compensation (or a goodwill payment) which is:(a) fair and reasonable in relation to the circumstances
SYSC 1.4.2RRP
A contravention of a rule in SYSC 11 to SYSC 18 does not give rise to a right of action by a private person under section 150 of the Act (and each of those rules is specified under section 150(2) of the Act as a provision giving rise to no such right of action).
COLL 6.9.3GRP
(1) Independence is likely to be lost if, by means of executive power, either relevant party could control the action of the other.(2) The board of one relevant party should not be able to exercise effective control of the board of another relevant party. Arrangements which might indicate this situation include quorum provisions and reservations of decision-making capacity of certain directors.(3) For an AUT, the FSA would interpret the concept of directors in common to include
SUP 12.6.10GRP
The rules and guidance relating to training and competence in SYSC 3 and SYSC 5 and 6 in TC for a firm carrying on retail business 6extend to any employee of the firm in respect of whom the relevant rules apply. For these purposes, an employee of a firm includes: (1) an individual who is an appointed representative of a firm; and(2) an individual who is employed or appointed by an appointed representative of a firm (whether under a contract of service or for services) in connection
SUP 4.3.12BGRP
1Both the actuarial function and the with-profits actuary function may be performed by employees of the firm or by external consultants, and performing other functions on behalf of the firm will not necessarily give rise to a significant conflict of interest. However, being a director, or a senior manager responsible, say, for sales or marketing in a firm (or for finance in a proprietary firm), is likely to give rise to a significant conflict of interest for an actuary performing
COBS 4.11.1RRP
(1) A firm must make an adequate record of any financial promotion it communicates or approves, other than a financial promotion made in the course of a personal visit, telephone conversation or other interactive dialogue.(2) For a telemarketing campaign, a firm must make an adequate record of copies of any scripts used.(3) A firm must retain the record in relation to a financial promotion relating to:(a) a pension transfer, pension opt-out or FSAVC, indefinitely;(b) a life policy,
LR 9.3.12RRP
LR 9.3.11 R does not apply if:(1) a generaldisapplication of statutory pre-emption rights has been authorised by shareholders in accordance with section 57053(Disapplication of pre-emption rights: directors acting under general authorisation) or section 571 (Disapplication of pre-emption rights by special resolution) of the Companies Act 2006 and the issue of equity securities or sale of treasury shares that are equity shares by the listed company is within the terms of the authority;
COLL 8.5.9RRP
(1) The value of the scheme property is the net value of the scheme property after deducting any outstanding borrowings (including any capital outstanding on a mortgage of an immovable).(2) Any part of the scheme property which is not an investment (save an immovable) must be valued at fair value.(3) For the purposes of (2), any charges that were paid, or would be payable, on acquiring or disposing of the asset must be excluded from the value of that asset.(4) The value of the
PERG 5.4.6GRP
Some typical examples of where the business test is unlikely to be satisfied, assuming that there is no direct financial benefit to the arranger, include:(1) arrangements which are carried out by a person for himself, or for members of his family;(2) where employers provide insurance benefits for staff; and(3) where affinity groups or clubs set up insurance benefits for members.
SUP 13A.9.5GRP
(1) The purpose of the precautionary measure rule is to ensure that an incoming EEA firm is subject to the standards of MiFID and the MiFID implementing Directive to the extent that the Home State has not transposed MiFID or the MiFID implementing Directive by 1 November 2007. It is to 'fill a gap'.(2) The rule is made in the light of the duty of the United Kingdom under Article 62 of MiFID to adopt precautionary measures to protect investors. (3) The rule will be effective for
SYSC 13.7.7GRP
Failures in processing information (whether physical, electronic or known by employees but not recorded) or of the security of the systems that maintain it can lead to significant operational losses. A firm should establish and maintain appropriate systems and controls to manage its information security risks. In doing so, a firm should have regard to:(1) confidentiality: information should be accessible only to persons or systems with appropriate authority, which may require
LR 15.2.12ARRP
1For the purposes of LR 15.2.11 R, a majority of the board or equivalent body of the applicant (including the Chairman) must not be:(1) directors, employees, partners, officers or professional advisers of or to:(a) an investment manager of the applicant; or(b) a master fund or investment manager referred to in LR 15.2.11R (2); or(c) any other company in the same group as the investment manager of the applicant; or(2) directors, employees or professional advisers of or to other
DISP 4.2.8RRP
None of the following is to be liable in damages for anything done or omitted to be done in the discharge (or purported discharge) of any functions in connection with the Voluntary Jurisdiction:318(1) FOS Ltd;(2) any member of its governing body;(3) any member of its staff;(4) any person acting as an Ombudsman for the purposes of the Financial Ombudsman Service;except where:(5) the act or omission is shown to have been in bad faith; or(6) it would prevent an award of damages being
PERG 2.11.3GRP
2An example of limitations which may be applied for or imposed include a limit on the types of client that a firm may deal with including:(1) retail (investment);(2) professional;(3) eligible counterparty;These limitations correspond to the Glossary terms retail client, professional client and eligible counterparty.
REC 2.5.10GRP
A conflict of interest arises in a situation where a person with responsibility to act in the interests of one person may be influenced in his action by an interest or association of his own, whether personal or business or employment related. Conflicts of interest can arise both for the employees of UK recognised bodies and for the members (or other persons) who may be involved in the decision-making process, for example where they belong to committees or to the governing body.