Related provisions for PERG 6.4.3
221 - 240 of 629 items.
An overseas recognised body is required to notify the FSA of certain events and give information to it on a regular basis and when certain specified events occur. Section 295 of the Act (Notification: overseas investment exchanges and overseas clearing houses) requires each overseas recognised body to provide the FSA, the Treasury and the Director General of Fair Trading with a report (at least once a year) which contains:(1) a statement as to whether any events have occurred
The following events are examples of events likely to affect an assessment of whether an overseas recognised body is continuing to satisfy the recognition requirements, or to have an effect on competition:(1) significant changes to any relevant law or regulation in its home territory, including laws or regulations:(a) governing exchanges or clearing houses;(b) designed to prevent insider dealing, market manipulation or other forms of market abuse or misconduct;(c) designed to
The Society must, as soon as it is practical to do so, notify the FSA of its intention to make any amendment which may alter the meaning or effect of any byelaw, including:(1) any Lloyd's trust deed;(2) any standard form letter of credit prescribed by the Society from time to time; or(3) any standard form guarantee agreement prescribed by the Society from time to time.
The information provided to the FSA by the Society under INSPRU 8.2.25 R must include:(1) a statement of the purpose of any proposed amendment or new Lloyd's trust deed and the expected impact, if any, on policyholders, managing agents, members, and potential members; and(2) a description of the consultation undertaken under INSPRU 8.2.26 R including a summary of any significant responses to that consultation.
116This chapter applies to:(1) every firm which is subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction and (apart from FEES 5.3, 5.4 and 5.8) every licensee which is subject to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction17of the Financial Ombudsman Service; and(2) every other person who is subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints.
The purpose of this chapter is to set out the requirements on firms to pay annual fees (through a general levy invoiced and collected by the FSA on behalf of FOS Ltd) and case fees (invoiced and collected directly by FOS Ltd) in order to fund the operation of the Financial Ombudsman Service.This Chapter4 also provides for unauthorised persons to pay case fees to FOS Ltd in respect of any relevant complaints which it handles.44
23Firms proposing to offer arrangements involving some form of minimum underpinning or 'guarantee' should discuss their proposals with the FSA and1 HM Revenue and Customs1 at the earliest possible opportunity (see DISP App 1.5.8 G). The FSA will need to be satisfied that these proposals provide complainants with redress which is at least commensurate with the standard approaches contained in this appendix.
23One of the reasons for introducing the guidance in this appendix is to seek a reduction in the number of complaints which are referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service. If a firm writes to the complainant proposing terms for settlement which are in accordance with this appendix, the letter may include a statement that the calculation of loss and redress accords with the FSAguidance, but should not imply that this extends to the assessment of whether or not the complaint should
23'Relevant benefits' are those benefits that fall outside what is required in order that policyholders' reasonable expectations at that point of sale can be fulfilled. (The phrase 'policyholders' reasonable expectations' has technically been superseded. However, the concept now resides within the obligations imposed upon firms by FSA Principle 6 ('...a firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly....') Additionally, most of these benefits would
This chapter sets out the FSA's approach to the supervision of recognised bodies and contains guidance on: (1) the arrangements for investigating complaints about recognised bodies made under section 299 of the Act (Complaints about recognised bodies) (REC 4.4); (2) the FSA's approach to the exercise of its powers under:(a) section 296 of the Act (FSA's power to give directions) to give directions to recognised bodies (REC 4.6);(b) section 297 of the Act (Revoking recognition)
The FSA's general approach to supervision is intended to ensure that:(1) the FSA has sufficient assurance that recognised bodies continue at all times to satisfy the recognition requirements and other obligations imposed by or under the Act and UK RIEs continue at all times to satisfy the MiFID implementing requirements1; and(2) the FSA's supervisory resources are allocated, and supervisory effort is applied, in ways which reflect the actual risks to the regulatory objectives.
(1) The authorised fund manager must, within four months after the end of each annual accounting period and two months after the end of each half-yearly accounting period respectively, make available and publish the long reports2 prepared in accordance with COLL 4.5.7R (1) to (3)2 (Contents of the annual long report) and COLL 4.5.8R (1) to (2)2 (Contents of the half-yearly long report).22(2) The reports referred to in (1) must:(a) be supplied free of charge to any person on request2;2(b)
(1) The purpose of REC 3.18 is to enable the FSA to monitor changes in the types of member admitted by UK recognised bodies and to ensure that the FSA has notice of foreign jurisdictions in which the members of UK recognised bodies are based. UK recognised bodies may admit persons who are not authorised persons or persons who are not located in the United Kingdom, provided that the recognition requirements continue to be met.(2) REC 3.18.2 R focuses on the admission of persons
Where a UK recognised body admits a member who is not an authorised person of a type of which, immediately before that time, that UK recognised body had not admitted to membership, it must immediately give the FSA notice of that event, and:(1) a description of the type of person whom it is admitting to membership; and (2) particulars of its reasons for considering that, in admitting that type of person to membership, it is able to continue to satisfy the recognition requirement
Where a UK recognised body admits for the first time a member whose head or registered office is in a jurisdiction from which that UK recognised body has not previously admitted members, it must immediately give the FSA notice of that event, and:(1) the name of that jurisdiction; (2) the name of any regulatory authority in that jurisdiction which regulates that member in respect of activities relating to specified investments; and(3) particulars of its reasons for considering
A firm (with the exception of a sole trader who does not employ any person who is required to be approved under section 59 of the Act (Approval for particular purposes))1 must:1(1) appoint an individual as MLRO, with responsibility for oversight of its compliance with the FSA'srules on systems and controls against money laundering; and(2) ensure that its MLRO has a level of authority and independence within the firm and access to resources and information sufficient to enable
(1) UK recognised bodies are encouraged to consider adopting appropriate internal procedures which will encourage their workers with concerns to blow the whistle internally about matters which are relevant to the functions of the FSA.(2) In considering appropriate internal procedures, UK recognised bodiesmay find the guidance provided to firms in SYSC 18.2.2 G (2) and SYSC 18.2.2 G (3)1 helpful.1
(1) If it appears to the FSA that there is, or there may be, a breach of the listing rules or the disclosure rules and transparency rules4 by an issuer with a premium listing4, the FSA may in writing require the issuer to appoint a sponsor to advise the issuer on the application of the listing rules, the disclosure rules and the transparency rules4.4(2) If required to do so under (1), an issuer must, as soon as practicable, appoint a sponsor to advise it on the application of
The firm may allocate the responsibility for its insurance mediation activity to an approved person (or persons) performing:(1) a governing function (other than the non-executive director function); or(2) the apportionment and oversight function; or(3) the significant management function in so far as it relates to dealing in investments as principal, disregarding article 15 of the Regulated Activities Order (Absence of holding out etc) (or agreeing to do so) or an activity which
(1) Typically a firm3 will appoint a person performing a governing function (other than the non-executive director function) to direct its insurance mediation activity. Where this responsibility is allocated to a person performing another function, the person performing the apportionment and oversight function with responsibility for the apportionment of responsibilities must ensure that the firm'sinsurance mediation activity is appropriately allocated.3(2) The descriptions of
The FSA will specify in the FSA Register the name of the persons to whom the responsibility for the firm'sinsurance mediation activity has been allocated. by inserting after the relevant controlled function the words "(insurance mediation)". In the case of a sole trader, the FSA will specify in the FSA Register the name of the sole trader as the 'contact person' in the firm.
Section 80 (1) of the Act (general duty of disclosure in listing
particulars) requires listing particulars submitted
to the FSA to contain all such information as investors
and their professional advisers would reasonably require, and reasonably expect
to find there, for the purpose of making an informed assessment of:(1) the assets and liabilities, financial
position, profits and losses, and prospects of the issuer of
the securities; and(2) the rights attaching to the securi
A request to the FSA to authorise the omission of specific
information in a particular case must:(1) be in writing from the issuer;(2) identify the specific information
concerned and the specific reasons for the omission; and(3) state why in the issuer's opinion
one or more of the grounds in section 82 of the Act applies.
The FSA would not normally seek to gather information using the methods described in SUP 2.3 or SUP 2.4 in a situation where the FSA could not have obtained it under the powers in Part XI of the Act (Information Gathering and Investigations). In particular, the limitations in the following sections of the Act are relevant to this chapter:(1) section 175(5) (Information and documents: supplementary powers) under which no person may be required under Part XI of the Act (Information
When the FSA obtains confidential information using the methods of information gathering described in SUP 2.3 or SUP 2.4, it is obliged under Part XXIII of the Act (Public Record, Disclosure of Information and Co-operation) to treat that information as confidential. The FSA will not disclose confidential information without lawful authority, for example if an exception applies under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Disclosure of Confidential Information) Regulations
In determining whether a UK recognised body has effective arrangements for monitoring and enforcing compliance with its rules (and, in the case of a UK RIE, its settlement arrangements), the FSA may have regard to:(1) the UK recognised body's ability to:(a) monitor and oversee the use of its facilities;(b) assess its members' compliance with its rules (and settlement arrangements, where appropriate);(c) assess the significance of any non-compliance;(d) take appropriate disciplinary
In assessing whether the procedures made by a UK recognised body to investigate complaints about the users of its facilities are satisfactory, the FSA may have regard to: (1) whether these procedures include arrangements which enable the UK recognised body to:(a) acknowledge complaints promptly;(b) consider and investigate these complaints objectively, promptly and thoroughly; (c) provide a timely reply to the complainant; and(d) keep adequate records of complaints and investigations;(2)
In assessing whether the arrangements include procedures for the fair, independent and impartial resolution of appeals against decisions of a UK recognised body, the FSA may have regard to at least the following factors: (1) the appeal procedures of the UK recognised body, including the composition and roles of any appeal committees or tribunals, and their relationship to the governing body; (2) the arrangements made to ensure prompt hearings of appeals from decisions made by
In assessing whether a UK recognised body's arrangements include appropriate provision for ensuring the application of any financial penalties in ways described in the recognition requirement, the FSA may have regard to: (1) the UK recognised body's policy regarding the application of financial penalties; (2) the arrangements made for applying that policy in individual cases; but the FSA does not consider that it is necessary for UK recognised bodies to follow any specific policy
In relation to adopting a reasonable approach to the time over which the payment shortfall or sale shortfall should be repaid,1the FSA takes the view that the determination of a reasonable repayment period will depend upon the individual circumstances. In appropriate cases this will mean that repayments are arranged over the remaining term. 11
Firms that propose to outsource aspects of customer relationships (including collection of debts or any other sums due1) should note that and SYSC 8,2 a firm cannot contract out its regulatory obligations and1 the FSA will continue to hold them responsible for the way in which this work is carried on.11
1To comply with paragraph 130 of the CESR recommendations, the FSA would expect a valuation report for a property company to be in accordance with either:1(1) the Appraisal and Valuation Standards (5th edition) issued by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors; or(2) the International Valuation Standards (7th edition) issued by the International Valuation Standards Committee.
1An applicant applying for admission to listing by way of a block listing must submit in final form, at least two business days before the FSA is to consider the application, a completed Application for Admission of Securities to the Official List. An application in respect of multiple schemes must identify the schemes but need not set out separate block listing amounts for each scheme.1Note: The Application for Admission of Securities to the Official List form can be found on
(1) An applicant applying for admission to listing by way of a block listing must notify an RIS of the number and type of securities that are the subject of the block listing application and the circumstances of their issue.(2) The notification in paragraph (1) must be made by 9 a.m. on the day the FSA is to consider the application.
Every six months the applicant must notify a RIS of the details of the number of securities covered by the block listing which have been allotted in the previous six months, using the Block Listing Six Monthly Return.1Note: A copy of the Block Listing Six Monthly Return can be found on the UKLA section of the FSA website.
(1) 1The FSAwill seek to deprive a firm of the financial benefit derived directly from the breach (which may include the profit made or loss avoided) where it is practicable to quantify this. The FSA will ordinarily also charge interest on the benefit.(2) Where the success of a firm’s entire business model is dependent on breaching FSA rules or other requirements of the regulatory system and the breach is at the core of the firm’s regulated activities, the FSA will seek to deprive
(1) The FSA will determine a figure that reflects the seriousness of the breach. In many cases, the amount of revenue generated by a firm from a particular product line or business area is indicative of the harm or potential harm that its breach may cause, and in such cases the FSA will determine a figure which will be based on a percentage of the firm’s revenue from the relevant products or business areas. The FSA also believes that the amount of revenue generated by a firm from
(1) The FSA may increase or decrease the amount of the financial penalty arrived at after Step 2, but not including any amount to be disgorged as set out in Step 1, to take into account factors which aggravate or mitigate the breach. Any such adjustments will be made by way of a percentage adjustment to the figure determined at Step 2.(2) The following list of factors may have the effect of aggravating or mitigating the breach:(a) the conduct of the firm in bringing (or failing
(1) If the FSA considers the figure arrived at after Step 3 is insufficient to deter the firm who committed the breach, or others, from committing further or similar breaches then the FSA may increase the penalty. Circumstances where the FSA may do this include:(a) where the FSA considers the absolute value of the penalty too small in relation to the breach to meet its objective of credible deterrence;(b) where previous FSA action in respect of similar breaches has failed to improve
The FSA and the firm on whom a penalty is to be imposed may seek to agree the amount of any financial penalty and other terms. In recognition of the benefits of such agreements, DEPP 6.7 provides that the amount of the financial penalty which might otherwise have been payable will be reduced to reflect the stage at which the FSA and the firm concerned reached an agreement. The settlement discount does not apply to the disgorgement of any benefit calculated at Step 1.
In respect of banking services, the European Commission believes that "...to determine where the activity was carried on, the place of provision of what may be termed the 'characteristic performance' of the service i.e. the essential supply for which payment is due, must be determined" (Commission interpretative communication: Freedom to provide services and the interests of the general good in the Second Banking Directive (97/C 209/04)). In the FSA's view , this requires consideration
The FSA is of the opinion that UK firms that are credit institutions and MiFID investment firms2 should apply the 'characteristic performance' test (as referred to in SUP App 3.6.7 G) when considering whether prior notification is required for services business. Firms should note that other EEA States may take a different view. Some EEA States may apply a solicitation test. This is a test as to whether it is the consumer or the provider that initiates the business relationshi
The FSA considers that, in order to comply with Principle 3:Management and control (see PRIN 2.1.1 R), a firm should have appropriate procedures to monitor the nature of the services provided to its customers. Where a UK firm has non-resident customers but has not notified the EEA State in which the customers are resident that it wishes to exercise its freedom to provide services, the FSA would expect the firm's systems to include appropriate controls. Such controls would include