Related provisions for SUP 9.4.3
101 - 120 of 349 items.
12Redress should in most cases be provided by meeting the cost of rearranging the policy, by way of a lump sum payment into the policy in respect of the higher rate of premium due from its inception. It may be appropriate in individual cases to take account of the lower premiums that the complainant will have paid to date. The guidance in DISP App 1.2, as to the circumstances in which this will be appropriate, will be relevant here.
Professional firms (broadly firms of solicitors, accountants and actuaries) may carry on insurance mediation activities in the course of their professional activities. Exempt professional firms carrying on insurance mediation activities may continue to be able to use the Part XX exemption to avoid any need for authorisation. PROF 2 (Status of exempt professional firm) contains guidance on the Part XX exemption. They will, however, need to be shown on the FSA Register as carrying
Professional firms with practices that involve acting for claimants in litigation against insurance undertakings are likely to be carrying on the regulated activity of assisting in the administration and performance of a contract of insurance. Exempt professional firms whose practices contain a material element of such activity should consider whether they can continue to take advantage of the Part XX exemption to avoid any need for authorisation, having regard to the relevant
The purpose of SUP 2.3 is to amplify Principle 11 in the context of information gathering by the FSA on its own initiative in the discharge of its functions under the Act. SUP 2.3 therefore sets out, in guidance on Principle 11 and in rules, how the FSA expects firms to deal with the FSA in that context, including the steps that a firm should take with a view to ensuring that certain connected persons should also cooperate with the FSA.
(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
4The FSA would expect to provide a UK recognised body with individual guidance on the amount of eligible financial resources which it considers would be sufficient for the UK recognised body to hold in respect of operational and other risks in order to satisfy the recognition requirements. In formulating its individual guidance, the FSA will ordinarily apply the approach described in REC 2.3.8 G, for UK RCHs, and REC 2.3.9 G, for UK RIEs.
4The FSA would normally expect to use the financial risk assessment prepared by the UK RIE in the course of preparing individual guidance on the amount of financial resources that it considers is sufficient for a UK RIE to hold in order to satisfy the recognition requirements. The financial risk assessment would provide the basis for calculating the amount of eligible financial resources that should be held by the UK RIE under the risk-based approach.
4The FSA would expect to consider the financial risk assessment, any proposal with respect to an operational risk buffer and, if applicable, the consolidated balance sheet, in formulating its guidance on the amount of eligible financial resources it considers to be sufficient for the UK RIE to hold in order to meet the recognition requirements. In formulating its guidance, the FSA would, where relevant, consider whether or not the financial risk assessment makes adequate provision
Factors that may be relevant in the assessment of a complaint under DISP 1.4.1R (2) include the following:59(1) all the evidence available and the particular circumstances of the complaint;(2) similarities with other complaints received by the respondent;(3) relevant guidance published by the
FSA
, other relevant regulators, the Financial Ombudsman Service or former schemes; and(4) appropriate analysis of decisions by the Financial Ombudsman Service concerning similar complaints
The FSA will consider the full circumstances of each case when determining whether or not to take action for a financial penalty or public censure. 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.(1) The nature, seriousness and impact of the suspected breach, including:(a) whether the breach was deliberate
The FSA's rules on systems and controls against money laundering are set out in SYSC 3.2 and SYSC 6.3. The FSA, when considering whether to take action for a financial penalty or censure in respect of a breach of those rules, will have regard to whether a firm has followed relevant provisions in the Guidance for the UK financial sector issued by the Joint Money Laundering Steering Group.
(1) The guidance relevant to delegation within the firm is also relevant to external delegation ('outsourcing'). A firm cannot contract out its regulatory obligations. So, for example, under Principle 3 a firm should take reasonable care to supervise the discharge of outsourced functions by its contractor.(2) A firm should take steps to obtain sufficient information from its contractor to enable it to assess the impact of outsourcing on its systems and controls.
CREDS sets out rules and guidance that are specific to credit unions. CREDS 10 refers to other more generally applicable provisions of the Handbook that are likely to be relevant to credit unions with Part IV permission to accept deposits. For details of these provisions, we would expect credit unions to access the full text in the Handbook.
If, exceptionally under the guidance at DISP App 1.5.13 G to DISP App 1.5.21 G, cash or shares derived from a corporate event are to be taken into account when assessing loss and redress, cash should be valued at the amount actually received and shares should be valued at their issue price. In both cases there should be no addition for interest.3434
Controlled activity and controlled investment are defined in Schedule 1 to the Financial Promotion Order and are listed in PERG 8.36.3 G and PERG 8.36.4 G. Broadly speaking, controlled activities and controlled investments are similar to regulated activities and specified investments under the Regulated Activities Order. However, with controlled activities, the exclusions set out in the Regulated Activities Order do not, in most cases, apply. It is important to note, however,
In the FSA's opinion, section 21 will apply to a communication (made in the course of business) if it contains an invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity which is addressed to a particular person or to persons generally. Where this is the case, it will not matter that the communication may be physically delivered to someone other than the person who is intended to engage in investment activity. PERG 8.6.10 G gives more guidance on this.
This chapter provides assistance in determining whether or not behaviour amounts to market abuse. It also forms part of the UK's implementation of the Market Abuse Directive (including its EU implementing legislation, that is Directive 2003/124/EC, Directive 2003/125/EC, Regulation 2273/2003 and Directive 2004/72/EC) and the auction regulation.4 It is therefore likely to be helpful to persons who:(1) want to avoid engaging in market abuseor to avoid requiring or encouraging another