Related provisions for BIPRU 13.5.5
121 - 140 of 164 items.
The FSAmay seek to vary a firm's Part IV permission on its own initiative
in certain situations including
the following:(1) If
the FSA determines
that a firm's management, business
or internal controls give rise
to material risks that are not fully addressed by its rules,
the FSAmay
seek to vary
the firm's Part
IV permission and impose an additional requirement or limitation on the firm.(2) If
a firm becomes or is to become
involved with new products or selling practices which
The Society must establish and maintain effective arrangements to monitor and manage risk arising from:(1) conflicts of interest (including in relation to (2) to (4));(2) inter-syndicate transactions, including reinsurance to close and approved reinsurance to close;(3) related party transactions; and(4) transactions between members and itself.
(1) The purposes of this section are to:(a) provide UK recognised bodies with guidance regarding the provisions of PIDA; and(b) Encourage UK recognised bodies to consider adopting and communicating to workers appropriate internal procedures for handling workers' concerns as part of an effective risk management system.(2) In this section "worker" includes, but is not limited to, an individual who has entered into a contract of employment.
Business and internal control risks vary from firm to firm, according to the nature and complexity of the business. The FSA's assessment of these risks is reflected in how its rules apply to different categories of firm as well as in the use of its other regulatory tools. One of the tools the FSA has available is to give a firm individual guidance on the application of the requirements or standards under the regulatory system in the firm's particular circumstances.
A firm may attribute an exposure value of zero for CCR to a securities financing transaction or to any other exposures in respect of that transaction (but excluding an exposure arising from collateral held to mitigate losses in the event of the default of other participants in the central counterparty's arrangements) which is outstanding with a central counterparty and has not been rejected by the central counterparty.[Note: BCD Annex III Part 2 point 6 in respect of SFTs]
In general a UCITS investment firm only calculates its capital and concentration risk requirements in relation to its designated investment business and does not calculate them with respect toscheme management activity. The effect of BIPRU 8.5.7 R is that this does not apply on a consolidated basis. For the purpose of this chapter the calculations are carried with respect to the whole of the activities of a UCITS investment firm.
(1) Where credit protection eligible under BIPRU 5 (Credit risk mitigation) and, if applicable, BIPRU 4.10 (Credit risk mitigation under the IRB approach) is provided directly to the SSPE, and that protection is reflected in the credit assessment of a position by a nominated ECAI, the risk weight associated with that credit assessment may be used.(2) If the protection is not eligible under BIPRU 5 (Credit risk mitigation) and, if applicable, BIPRU 4.10 (Credit risk mitigation
(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
2When considering an application for a waiver of the requirements in BIPRU 9.4.11R and BIPRU 9.4.12R, the FSA may undertake a visit to the firm in order to examine the firm's risk management and governance arrangements. Before such a visit, the FSA may request information from the firm additional or supplementary to that provided in the waiver application.
A firm must be able to satisfy the FSA that it has adequate risk management processes to control the 1risks to which the firm may be exposed as a result of carrying out credit risk mitigation. Those processes must include appropriate stress tests and scenario analyses relating to those risks, including residual risk and the risks relating to the intrinsic value of the credit risk mitigation1.[Note: BCD Annex VIII Part 2 point 1]1
Subject to BIPRU 9.9.5 R,(1) where a firm calculates risk weighted exposure amounts under the standardised approach to securitisations outlined in BIPRU 9.11, the exposure value of an on-balance sheet securitisation position must be its balance sheet value;(2) where a firm calculates risk weighted exposure amounts under the IRB approach to securitisations outlined in BIPRU 9.12, the exposure value of an on-balance sheet securitisation position must be measured gross of value adjustments;(3)
A firm must introduce adequate organisational arrangements to minimise the risk of the loss or diminution of clients' safe custody assets,2 or the rights in connection with those safe custody assets,2 as a result of the misuse of the safe custody assets,2 fraud, poor administration, inadequate record-keeping or negligence.[Note: article 16(1)(f) of the MiFID implementing Directive]222