Related provisions for BIPRU 8.6.4
61 - 80 of 124 items.
(1) In assessing whether a penalty would cause an individual serious financial hardship, the FSA will consider the individual’s ability to pay the penalty over a reasonable period (normally no greater than three years). The FSA’s starting point is that an individual will suffer serious financial hardship only if during that period his net annual income will fall below £14,000 and his capital will fall below £16,000 as a result of payment of the penalty. Unless the FSA believes
12Where it is otherwise reasonable for "savings" to be brought into account, determining whether or not a complainant is of sufficient means and, if so, to what extent the "savings" are to be brought into account, will have to be based on the facts of each individual case. It will be appropriate to require the complainant to provide adequate information to assist the firm in this task. Matters to be taken into account in this assessment may include:(1) the length of the remaining
(1) As part of its obligations under GENPRU 1.2.30 R (Processes, strategies and systems for risks) and GENPRU 1.2.36 R (Stress and scenario tests) a firm must carry out an evaluation of its exposure to the interest rate risk arising from its non-trading activities.(2) The evaluation under (1) must cover the effect of a sudden and unexpected parallel change in interest rates of 200 basis points in both directions.(3) A firm must immediately notify the FSA if any evaluation under
If a firm ceases to be a participant firm part way through a financial year of the compensation scheme:(1) it will remain liable for any unpaid levies which the FSCS has already made on the firm;1(2) the FSCS may make a levy upon it (which may be before or after the firmhas ceased to be a participant firm, but must be before it ceases to be an authorised person) for the costs which it would have been liable to pay had the FSCS made a levy on all participant firms at the time
For hybrid pools of purchased retail exposure receivables where the purchasing firm cannot separate exposures secured by real estate collateral and qualifying revolving retail exposures from other retail exposures, the retail risk weight2 function producing the highest capital requirements for those exposures must apply.[Note: BCD Annex VII Part 1 point 16]
In determining whether the UK recognised body meets the recognition requirement in Regulation 6(3), the FSA may have regard to whether that body has ensured that the person who performs that function on its behalf:(1) has sufficient resources to be able to perform the function (after allowing for any other activities);(2) has adequate systems and controls to manage that function and to report on its performance to the UK recognised body;(3) is managed by persons of sufficient
This table belongs to COLL 5.1.2G (2).
Scheme investments and investment techniques |
Limits for UCITS schemes |
Limits for non-UCITS retail schemes |
||
Permissible investment |
Maximum limit |
Permissible investment |
Maximum limit |
|
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Transferable securities that are not approved securities |
Yes |
10% |
Yes |
20% |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Regulated schemes other than qualified investor schemes1 |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
Unregulated schemes and qualified investor schemes1 |
No |
N/A |
Yes |
20%(C)1 |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Immovables (i.e real property) |
No |
N/A |
Yes |
None |
Gold |
No |
N/A |
Yes |
10% |
Hedging |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
|
Underwriting |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
Borrowing |
Yes |
10% (T) |
Yes |
10% |
Cash and near cash |
Yes |
None |
Yes |
None |
Note: |
Meaning of terms used: |
|||
A percentage |
an upper limit (though there may be limits of other kinds). |
|||
"(T)" |
temporary only- see COLL 5.5.4R(4) |
|||
"N/A" |
Not applicable1 |
|||
1“(C)” |
In the case of a non-UCITS retail scheme operating as a FAIF there is no maximum limit - see COLL 5.7.7 R. |
|||
A firm must calculate the net position in each currency other than the settlement currency of the master netting agreement by subtracting from the total value of securities denominated in that currency lent, sold or provided under the master netting agreement added to the amount of cash in that currency lent or transferred under the agreement, the total value of securities denominated in that currency borrowed, purchased or received under the agreement added to the amount of cash
The position is slightly more blurred with individuals. The ‘in the course of business’ test is intended to exclude genuine non-business communications. Examples of these would be friends talking in a pub, letters between family members or e-mails sent by individuals using an Internet chat-room or bulletin board for personal reasons. An issue arises where capital is raised for small private companies. Where such a company is already in operation, it will be acting ‘in the course
In negotiating its contract with a service provider, a firm should have regard to:(1) reporting or notification requirements it may wish to impose on the service provider;(2) whether sufficient access will be available to its internal auditors, external auditors or actuaries (see section 341 of the Act) and to the FSA (see SUP 2.3.5 R (Access to premises) and SUP 2.3.7 R (Suppliers under material outsourcing arrangements);(3) information ownership rights, confidentiality agreements
In using the scenario matrix approach, none of the steps followed will take specific account of a firm's exposure to rho risk. Where a firm can demonstrate that for interest rate-related options the rho sensitivity is effectively included in the delta sensitivities produced, there is no separate capital requirement relating to rho. For all other options except commodity options, a firm should calculate a rho sensitivity ladder by currency using its CAD 1 model and either feed
The exposure value must be the value presented in the financial statements. Admissible equity exposure measures are the following:(1) for investments held at fair value with changes in value flowing directly through income and into capital resources, the exposure value is the fair value presented in the balance sheet;(2) for investments held at fair value with changes in value not flowing through income but into a tax-adjusted separate component of equity, the exposure value is
BIPRU 7.11.5 R requires a firm to recognise any premiums payable or receivable under the contract as notional zero-specific-risk securities. These positions are then entered into the general market risk framework. As premium payments paid under such contracts are contingent on no credit event occurring, a credit event could significantly change the general market risk capital requirement. A firm should consider, under the overall Pillar 2 rule, whether this risk means that the