Related provisions for DEPP 6A.3.4
1 - 8 of 8 items.
The power to impose a suspension
or a restriction is a disciplinary measure which the FSA may use in addition to, or instead of, imposing a financial penalty
or issuing a public censure.
The principal purpose of imposing a suspension or a restriction is to promote
high standards of regulatory and/or market conduct by deterring persons who have committed breaches from
committing further breaches,
helping to deter other persons from
committing similar breaches,
and demonstrating
As the power
to impose a suspension or a restriction is a disciplinary measure, where the FSA considers it necessary to take action, for example, to protect consumers from an authorised
person, the FSA will seek to cancel or vary the authorised
person'spermissions.
If the FSA has
concerns with a person's fitness
to be approved, and considers it necessary to take action, the FSA will
seek to prohibit the approved person or
withdraw its approval.
The FSA will consider it appropriate to impose a suspension or restriction
where it believes that such action will be a more effective and persuasive
deterrent than the imposition of a financial penalty alone. This is likely
to be the case where the FSA considers that direct and visible action in relation to a particular breach is necessary. Examples of circumstances
where the FSA may
consider it appropriate to impose a suspension or restriction include:(1) where the FSA (or
The deterrent effect and impact
on a person of a suspension
or restriction, by itself or in combination with a financial penalty, may
be greater than where only a financial penalty is imposed. The FSA will consider the overall impact and deterrent effect of the
sanctions it imposes when determining the level of penalty and the length
of suspension or restriction.
The FSA expects usually to take the following approach in respect of
the interaction between a suspension or restriction and a financial penalty
or public censure:(1) The FSA will determine which sanction, or combination of sanctions, is
appropriate for the breach.(2) If the FSA, following the approach set out in DEPP 6.2, considers it appropriate
to impose a financial penalty, it will calculate the appropriate level of
the financial penalty, following the approach set out in
The FSA may depart from the approach set out in DEPP 6A.4.2 G.
For example, the FSA may
at the outset consider that a financial penalty is the only appropriate sanction
for a breach but, having determined
the appropriate level of financial penalty, may consider it appropriate to
reduce the amount of the financial penalty for serious financial hardship
reasons. In such a situation, the FSA may consider it appropriate to impose a suspension or restriction
even if the FSA at
the
The FSA will consider all the relevant circumstances of a case when it
determines the length of the period of suspension or restriction (if any)
that is appropriate for the breach concerned,
and is also a sufficient deterrent. Set out below is a list of factors that
may be relevant for this purpose. The list is not exhaustive: not all of these
factors may be applicable in a particular case, and there may be other factors,
not listed, that are relevant.
The following factors may be relevant
to determining the appropriate length of the period of suspension or restriction
to be imposed on a person under
the Act:(1) DeterrenceWhen determining
the appropriate length of the period of suspension or restriction, the FSA will
have regard to the principal purpose for which it imposes sanctions, namely
to promote high standards of regulatory and/or market conduct by deterring persons who have committed breaches from
committing further
The FSA may delay the commencement of the period of suspension or restriction.
In deciding whether this is appropriate, the FSA will take into account all the circumstances of a case. Considerations
that may be relevant in respect of an authorised
person include:(1) the impact of the suspension or
restriction on consumers;(2) any practical measures the authorised person needs to take before the period of suspension or restriction
begins, for example, changes to its systems and
Some of the distinguishing features of notices given under enactments other than the Act are as follows: (1) Building Societies Act 1986, section 36A: There is no right to refer a decision to issue a prohibition order under section 36A to the Tribunal. Accordingly, a decision notice under section 36A(5A) is not required to give an indication of whether any such right exists. A decision notice under section 36A(5A) may only relate to the issue of a prohibition order under section
Persons subject to enforcement action may be prepared to agree the amount of any financial penalty, or the length of any period of suspension or restriction,2 and other conditions which the FSA seeks to impose by way of such action. Such conditions might include, for example, the amount or mechanism for the payment of compensation to consumers. The FSA recognises the benefits of such agreements, in that they offer the potential for securing earlier redress or protection for consumers
1This
manual (DEPP) is relevant to firms, approved
persons and other persons,
whether or not they are regulated by the FSA. It sets out:(1) the FSA's decision-making procedure for giving statutory
notices. These are warning
notices, decision notices and supervisory notices (DEPP 1.2 to DEPP 5);(2) the FSA's policy with respect to the imposition and amount of penalties
under the Act (see DEPP 6);(2A) 2the FSA's policy
with respect to the imposition of suspensions or restrictions,