Related provisions for SUP 10C.13.22
21 - 40 of 276 items.
The FCA3 recognises that a UK RIE3 has legitimate interests of its own and that its general business policy may properly be influenced by other persons (such as its owners). Such a connection does not necessarily imply the existence of a conflict of interest nor is it necessary to exclude individuals closely connected with other persons (for example, those responsible for the stewardship of the owner's interests) from all decision-making processes in a UK recognised body. However,
Members will individually comply with this chapter if and only if all complaints by policyholders against members are dealt with under the Lloyd's complaints procedures. Accordingly, certain of the obligations under this chapter, for example the obligation to report on complaints received and the obligation to pay fees under the rules relating to the funding of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FEES 5), must be complied with by the Society on behalf of members. Managing agents
(1) In assessing whether a penalty would cause an individual serious financial hardship, the FCA3 will consider the individual’s ability to pay the penalty over a reasonable period (normally no greater than three years). The FCA's3 starting point is that an individual will suffer serious financial hardship only if during that period his net annual income will fall below £14,000 and his capital will fall below £16,000 as a result of payment of the penalty. Unless the FCA3 believes
(1) The FCA3 will consider reducing the amount of a penalty if a firm will suffer serious financial hardship as a result of having to pay the entire penalty. In deciding whether it is appropriate to reduce the penalty, the FCA3 will take into consideration the firm’s financial circumstances, including whether the penalty would render the firm insolvent or threaten the firm’s solvency. The FCA3 will also take into account its statutory objectives3, for example in situations where
Where the FCA3 considers that, following commencement of an FCA3 investigation, an individual or firm has reduced their solvency in order to reduce the amount of any disgorgement or financial penalty payable, for example by transferring assets to third parties, the FCA3 will normally take account of those assets when determining whether the individual or firm would suffer serious financial hardship as a result of the disgorgement and financial penalty.333
The FCA would not consider it unusual if a person who has overall responsibility for a particular function was not a member of the governing body. For example, in some firms, the head of compliance reports directly to the governing body even though the head compliance is not a member of the governing body.
1However, there are likely to be circumstances in which the FCA will need to use the electronic commerce activity direction power. Examples could include where it was necessary to stop the behaviour complained of, or to make the continued provision of services by the incoming ECA provider conditional upon compliance with specified requirements. Overall, the FCA may use the direction power: (1) where: (a) the behaviour complained of was causing, or had the potential to cause,
1The question of whether the FCA decides to prevent or prohibit the incoming electronic commerce activity, or to make it subject to certain requirements (for example, compliance with specified rules), will depend on the overall circumstance of the case. A relevant consideration will be whether the FCA is satisfied that its concerns over the incoming electronic commerce activity can be adequately addressed through the imposition of a requirement, rather than a complete prohibition
- (1)
In the FCA's view:
- (a)
- (b)
a person who performs a significant influence function for, or is a senior manager of, a firm would normally be expected to be part of the firm'sBIPRU Remuneration Code staff;
- (c)
the table in (2) provides a non-exhaustive list of examples of key positions that should, subject to (d), be within a firm's definition of staff who are risk takers;
- (d)
firms should consider how the examples in the table in (2) apply to their own organisational structure;
1 - (e)
firms may find it useful to set their own metrics to identify their risk takers based, for example, on trading limits; and
- (f)
a firm should treat a person as being BIPRU Remuneration Code staff in relation to remuneration in respect of a given performance year if they were BIPRU Remuneration Code staff for any part of that year.
[Note: The FCA has published guidance on the application of particular rules on remuneration structures in relation to individuals who are BIPRU Remuneration Code staff for only part of a given performance year. This guidance is available at www.fca.org.uk/firms/remuneration
.]
- (2)
High-level category
Suggested business lines
Heads of significant business lines (including regional heads) and any individuals or groups within their control who have a material impact on the firm's risk profile
Fixed income
Foreign exchange
Commodities
Securitisation
Sales areas
Investment banking (including mergers and acquisitions advisory)
Commercial banking
Equities
Structured finance
Lending quality
Trading areas
Research
Heads of support and control functions and other individuals within their control who have a material impact on the firm's risk profile
Credit/market/operational risk
Legal
Treasury controls
Human resources
Compliance
Internal audit
(1) Variable remuneration may be justified, for example, to incentivise employees involved in new business ventures which could be loss-making in their early stages. (2) The governing body (or, where appropriate, the remuneration committee) should approve performance adjustment policies, including the triggers under which adjustment would take place. The FCA may ask firms to provide a copy of their policies and expects firms to make adequate records of material decisions to operate
(1) The FCA would not consider it unusual if a person who has local responsibility for a particular function was not a member of the branch’sgoverning body or equivalent. (2) For example, in some branches, the head of compliance may report directly to the branch’sgoverning body even though the head of compliance is not a member of the governing body.
The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of conduct that would be in breach of rule 1.(1) Misleading (or attempting to mislead) by act or omission:(a) a client; or(b) the firm for whom the person works (or its auditors); or(c) the FCA or;(d) the PRA.(2) Falsifying documents.(3) Misleading a client about:(a) the risks of an investment;(b) the charges or surrender penalties of products;(c) the likely performance of products by providing inappropriate projections of future
The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of conduct that would be in breach of rule 3.(1) Failing to report promptly in accordance with their firm's internal procedures (or, if none exist, direct to the regulator concerned), information in response to questions from the FCA, the PRA, or both the PRA and the FCA.(2) Failing without good reason to: (a) inform a regulator of information of which the approved person was aware in response to questions from that regulator;
The firm is responsible for ensuring delivery of the required report38 by the due date. If a report is received by the FCA28 after the due date and the firm believes its delivery arrangements were adequate, it may be required to provide proof of those arrangements. Examples of such proof would be:494949(1) "proof of posting" receipts from a UK post office or overseas equivalent which demonstrates that the report was posted early enough to allow delivery by the due date in accordance
Examples of where the FCA will consider that a reverse takeover is in contemplation include situations where:(1) the shell company6 has approached the target's board;(2) the shell company6 has entered into an exclusivity period with a target; or(3) the shell company6 has been given access to begin due diligence work (whether or not on a limited basis).
8Examples of when a sponsor should submit a cancellation request pursuant to LR 8.7.22 R include, but are not limited to:(1) situations where the sponsor ceases to satisfy the ongoing criteria for approval as a sponsor in accordance with LR 8.6.6 R and, following a notification made under LR 8.7.8 R, there are no ongoing discussions with the FCA which could lead to the conclusion that the sponsor remains eligible; or(2) where there is a change of control of the sponsor or any
(1) Sections 137H and 137I of the Act enables the FCA6 to make rules that render void any provision of an agreement that contravenes specified prohibitions in the Remuneration Code, and that provide for the recovery of any payment made, or other property transferred, in pursuance of such a provision. SYSC 19A.3.53A R and1SYSC 19A.3.54 R (together with SYSC 19A Annex 1) are such rules1 and render1 void provisions of an agreement that contravene the specified prohibitions on guaranteed
An example of a rule20 being interpreted as cut back by GEN 2.2.23R is SYSC 6.1.1R, which requires a firm to maintain adequate policies and procedures to ensure compliance with its obligations under the regulatory system; SYSC 6.1.1R should be interpreted as applied by the FCA in respect of a PRA-authorised person’s compliance with regulatory obligations that are the responsibility of the FCA (for example, in respect of a bank maintaining policies and procedures to ensure compliance
The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of conduct that would be in breach of rule SC2.(1) Failing to take reasonable steps to implement (either personally or through a compliance department or other departments) adequate and appropriate systems of control to comply with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system for the activities of the firm.(2) Failing to take reasonable steps to monitor (either personally or through a compliance department
2When the FCA has concerns about the fitness and propriety of an approved person, it may consider whether it should prohibit that person from performing functions in relation to regulated activities, withdraw its approval, or both. In deciding whether to withdraw its approval and/or make a prohibition order, the FCA will consider in each case whether its statutory objectives can be achieved adequately by imposing disciplinary sanctions, for example, public censures or financial
2The following are examples of types of behaviour which have previously resulted in FCA the deciding to issue a prohibition order or withdraw the approval of an approved person:(1) Providing false or misleading information to the FCA; including information relating to identity, ability to work in the United Kingdom, and business arrangements;
(2)
Failure to disclose material considerations on application forms, such as details of County
1The FCA is responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with the Money Laundering Regulations2 not only by authorised firms who are within the Money Laundering Regulations’ scope, but also by what the Regulations describe as “Annex I financial institutions”. These are businesses which are not otherwise authorised by us but which carry out certain of the activities listed in Annex I of the Banking Consolidation Directive28, now Annex I of the CRD. The activities include
1The Money Laundering Regulations add to the range of options available to the FCA for dealing with anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing 2 failures. These options include2:• to prosecute a relevant person, including but not limited to an 2authorised firm, an 2Annex I financial institution or an auction platform, as well as any responsible officer2;2• to fine or censure a relevant person, including but not limited to an2 authorised firm, an2 Annex I financial institution