Related provisions for BIPRU 8.5.3
141 - 160 of 392 items.
1The FCA may request the court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction in cases, for example, where it has evidence showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that a person will contravene a requirement of the Act and that the contravention will result in the dissipation of assets belonging to investors.
If a firm intends either (a) to remedy a fall in capital resources, or (b) to prevent such a fall, for example, by taking management action to reduce the risks to which a with-profits fund is exposed or by reducing non-contractual benefits for policyholders, it should explain to the FCA how such proposed actions are consistent with the firm's obligations under Principle 6 (Customers' interests).
1When, in relation to firms, the FCA applies the broad test outlined in paragraph 10.2.2, it will consider the relative effectiveness of the other powers available to it, compared with injunctive relief. For example, where the FCA has concerns about whether a firm will comply with restrictions that the FCA could impose by exercising its own-initiative powers, it may decide it would be more appropriate to seek an injunction. This is because breaching any requirement imposed by
The extent to which a person can rely on individual guidance given to him will depend on many factors. These could include, for example, the degree of formality of the original query and the guidance given, and whether all relevant information was submitted with the request. Individual guidance is usually given in relation to a set of particular circumstances which exist when the guidance is given. If the circumstances later change, for example, because of a change in the circumstances
(1) The steps that a relevant authorised person must take to secure that its conduct rules staff understand how the rules in COCON apply to them include the provision of suitable training.(2) Suitable training should always ensure that those who are subject to the rules in COCON have an awareness and broad understanding of all of the rules in COCON, and that they also have a deeper understanding of the practical application of the specific rules which are relevant to their work.(3)
For example, the complainant may have reasonably expected that the claim would have been paid where the firm failed to disclose appropriately an exclusion or limitation later relied on by the insurer to reject the claim and it should have been clear to the firm that that exclusion or limitation was relevant to the complainant.
1As described above, the FCA operates special decision-making arrangements under which members of FCA senior management take decisions on FCA settlements. This means that settlement discussions will take place without involving the RDC. The FCA would expect to hold any settlement discussions on the basis that neither FCA staff nor the person concerned would seek to rely against the other on any admissions or statements made if the matter is considered subsequently by the RDC or
1An important consideration before an enforcement investigation and/or enforcement action is taken forward is the nature of a firm’s overall relationship with the FCA and whether, against that background, the use of enforcement tools is likely to further the FCA's aims and objectives. So, for any similar set of facts, using enforcement tools will be less likely if a firm has built up over time a strong track record of taking its senior management responsibilities seriously and
1When it considers whether to use its investigative power, and whether section 169(4) applies, the FCA will first consider whether it is able to assist without using its formal powers, for example by obtaining the information voluntarily. Where that is not possible, the FCA may take into account all of the factors in section 169(4), but may give particular weight to the seriousness of the case and its importance to persons in the United Kingdom, and to the public interest.
1The FCA recognises that preliminary findings letters serve a very useful purpose in focussing decision making on the contentious issues in the case. This in turn makes for better quality and more efficient decision making. However, there are exceptional circumstances in which the FCA may decide it is not appropriate to send out a preliminary findings letter. This includes: (1) where the subject consents to not receiving a preliminary findings letter; or (2) where it is not practicable
Where a customer is unable to:(1) enter into a new regulated mortgage contract or home purchase plan or vary the terms of an existing regulated mortgage contract or home purchase plan with the existing mortgage lender or home purchase provider; or(2) enter into a new regulated mortgage contract or home purchase plan with a new mortgage lender or home purchase provider;the existing mortgage lender or home purchase provider should not (for example, by offering less favourable interest
1Enforcement cases often involve multiple parties, for example a firm and individuals in the firm. Enforcement action may be appropriate against just the firm, just the individuals or both. In some cases, it will not be possible to reach an acceptable settlement unless all parties are able to reach agreement.
The risk of loss or diminution of rights in connection with client money can arise where a firm's organisational arrangements give rise to the possibility that client money held by the firm may be paid for the account of a client whose money is yet to be received by the firm. Consistent with the requirement to hold client money as trustee (see CASS 7.17.5 G), a firm should ensure its organisational arrangements are adequate to minimise such a risk. This may include, for example,
2Information may also be provided to the FCA voluntarily. For example, firms may at times commission an internal investigation or a report from an external law firm or other professional adviser and decide to pass a copy of this report to the FCA. Such reports can be very helpful for the FCA in circumstances where enforcement action is anticipated or underway. The FCA's approach to using firm-commissioned reports in an enforcement context is set out at the end of this chapter.
1A disapplication order in relation to exempt regulated activities made against a member will be relevant should that member subsequently apply for authorisation under the Act. Whether or not such an application for authorisation is successful will depend on many factors, including the FCA's grounds for making the disapplication order. For example, if the order for disapplication of the exemption was made on the grounds of a breach of rules made under section 332(1) of the Act,