Related provisions for MCOB 7.6.12

21 - 40 of 72 items.

Search Term(s)

Filter by Topics

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

FEES 4.4.9DRP
3To the extent that a firm4 has provided the information required by FEES 4.4.7 D to the FCA as part of its compliance with another provision of the Handbook, it is deemed to have complied with the provisions of that direction.444
DISP App 3.1.5GRP
In this appendix:(1) (a) at step 1,3 “historic interest” means the interest the complainant paid to the firm because a payment protection contract was added to a loan or credit product;3(b) at step 2, “historic interest” means in relation to any sum, the interest the complainant paid as a result of that sum being included in the loan or credit product;32(2) "simple interest" means a non-compound rate of 8% per annum;3(3) "claim" means a claim by a complainant seeking to rely upon
PERG 2.6.11HGRP
  1. (1)

    The main provision within the definition of alternative debenture arrangements that seeks to ensure that only instruments that display the characteristics of a debt security can be alternative debentures is set out at PERG 2.6.11CG (5). It provides that the amount of additional payments under the arrangements must not exceed an amount which would, at the time the bond is issued, be a reasonable commercial return on a loan of capital. Where the return is not fixed at the outset, it is the maximum possible amount of the additional payments that must be considered in deciding this question. The following example demonstrates how this condition should be approached.

    2. Example

    ABC Ltd is a property development company. It wishes to increase its portfolio on a short-term basis. It issues 5-year sukuk to investors and uses the proceeds to buy the head lease of a commercial property. The rental income from the lease is distributed to investors in proportion to their holdings without a cap on the level of return. After 5 years, the head lease is sold on at a profit and the proceeds shared between investors.

    In this example, the investors participate directly in the success or failure of the underlying property business. The sakk is not really in the nature of a debt instrument. It is unlikely to be an alternative debenture as:

    • additional payments under the arrangements would exceed a reasonable commercial return on a loan of the capital.

      Further, where the return is not fixed at the outset, it is the maximum possible amount of the additional payments that must be considered. Here, the issue terms of the sukuk impose no upper limit on the amount of the periodic distributions: a sakk holder subscribing 1,000 may, in a year, get back 200 or 2,000 or nothing depending on the rental market. The maximum potential return is clearly in excess of a reasonable commercial return on a loan of 1,000; and

    • the arrangements have not been admitted to an official list or admitted to trading on a regulated market or recognised investment exchange (see PERG 2.6.11CG (6)).
  2. (2)

    If, in the above example, investors returns were capped at 500 per sakk per year, then this is the amount that must be considered in deciding whether the return exceeds a reasonable commercial return on a loan, even where the amounts actually received turn out to be far lower.

  3. (3)

    In applying the reasonable commercial return test, the sakk should be compared to a hypothetical loan to the issuer on similar terms and carrying similar risks. For example, a conventional security convertible into shares will normally carry a lower rate of interest because the conversion right has a value. The return on an exchangeable or convertible sakk should be measured against the return on an equivalent exchangeable or convertible debt security.

  4. (4)

    The risk to investors in sukuk may vary slightly from that of a conventional bond in some instances. This may be due to the fact that sukuk holders only have recourse to the bond assets or some other structural feature which results in the risk profile being higher. In such instances it may be justifiable for the rate of return to be slightly higher than that of a conventional loan.

  5. (5)

    As with any financial instrument, the pricing of sukuk will depend on the issuers view of the market at the time of issue and reasonable commercial return may vary depending on the issuer and the economic circumstances prevalent at the time of issue.

MCOB 6.4.11RRP
A firm must ensure that the offer document contains a prominent statement:(1) of the period for which the offer is valid;(2) explaining, where the regulated mortgage contract contains features, such as additional unsecured borrowing facilities, which could result in the customer borrowing more money, that where such features are used, the amount of the customer's debt will increase;(3) explaining when any interest rate change on the regulated mortgage contract takes effect. This
COLL 5.6.2GRP
(1) This section contains rules on the types of permitted investments and any relevant limits with which non-UCITS retail schemes must comply. These rules allow for the relaxation of certain investment and borrowing powers from the requirements of the UCITS Directive. Consequently, a scheme authorised as a non-UCITS retail schemewill not qualify for the cross border passporting rights conferred by the UCITS Directive on a UCITS scheme.(2) Some examples of the different investment
MCOB 1.6.5GRP
(1) MCOB 1.6.4 R(2) means, for example, that if a firm discovered immediately after completion that a loan was a regulated mortgage contract, the firm would be required to comply with MCOB 7.4 (Disclosure at the start of the contract).(2) Although MCOB 1.6.4 R recognises that firms may become aware that a mortgage is a regulated mortgage contract at a late stage, the FCA expects this to be an extremely rare occurrence. It could arise, for example, if a firm has acted on the understanding,
PERG 4.5.15GRP
In the FCA's view, details of fees or commission referred to in PERG 4.5.14G (2) does not require an introducer to provide an actual sum to the borrower, where it is not possible to calculate the full amount due prior to the introduction. This may arise in cases where the fee or commission is a percentage of the eventual loan taken out and the amount of the required loan is not known at the time of the introduction. In these cases, it would be sufficient for the introducer to