Related provisions for MCOB 2.9.2

161 - 180 of 412 items.
Results filter

Search Term(s)

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).

MCOB 11.8.1ERP
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
SYSC 4 Annex 1GRP

[Editor’s note: The text of this provision has been moved to SYSC 25 Annex 1G]4

EG 5.4.1RP
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.
DTR 1.4.4GRP
Examples of when the FCA may require the suspension of trading of a financial instrument include:(1) if an issuer fails to make an2 announcement as required by the Market Abuse Regulation2 within the applicable time-limits which the FCA considers could affect the interests of investors or affect the smooth operation of the market; or(2) if there is or there may be a leak of inside information and the issuer is unwilling or unable to issue an appropriate2 announcement required
EG 16.4.2RP
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,
DEPP 8.3.1GRP
1Examples of situations where the FCA may use the own-initiative variation of approval power include where:(1) it has concerns about an SMF manager’s fitness to remain approved in relation to the performance of a designated senior management function but, in all the circumstances, it considers it appropriate to vary their approval by imposing one or more conditions or a time limitation, rather than making a prohibition order or withdrawing approval;(2) the nature or scope of the
REC 2A.1.3GRP
The RAP regulations apply modified provisions of the Act to an RAP. For example, an RAP is an exempt person in respect of its business as an auction platform due to the application of section 285 of the Act as modified by the the RAP regulations. Similarly, section 293 of the Act is applied and modified by the RAP regulations to provide for notification rules and notification requirements in relation to RAPs.
LR 6.13.2GRP
1In considering whether an applicant has satisfied LR 6.13.1R, the FCA will consider, among other things, whether the board of the applicant consists solely of non-executive directors and whether significant elements of the strategic decision-making of or planning for the applicant take place outside the applicant’s group, for example with an external management company.
RCB 3.6.4GRP
The issuer or the owner, as the case may be, should review legal advice as necessary. For example, advice should be reviewed if a relevant statutory provision is amended or where a new decision or judgment of a court might have a bearing on the conclusions reached which is material to the issuer's or owner's compliance with the requirements of the RCB Regulations or the RCB.
BIPRU 14.2.9GRP
The operation of BIPRU 14.2.8 R can be illustrated by an example as follows: where the credit derivative is a first to default transaction, the appropriate percentage for the potential future credit exposure will be determined by the lowest credit quality of the underlying obligations in the basket. If there are non-qualifying items in the basket, the percentage applicable to the non-qualifying reference obligation should be used. For second and subsequent to default transactions,
BIPRU 14.2.24GRP
For example, in relation to BIPRU 14.2.23 R, collateral which is eligible only against trading bookexposures will not be applicable against non-trading bookexposures; and the large exposures limits on non-trading book positions will also remain applicable.
BIPRU 7.8.29GRP
The table in BIPRU 7.8.30G gives an example of the reduced net underwriting position calculation. The example is based on the firm starting with a commitment to underwrite £100 million of a new equity issue. Firms are reminded that in the case of an equity, the reduced net underwriting position should be treated under the simplified equity method (see BIPRU 7.8.27R (Simplified and standard equity methods) and BIPRU 7.8.27R).
BIPRU 7.8.30GRP

Table: Example of the reduced net underwriting position calculation

This table belongs to BIPRU 7.8.29G

Time

Net underwriting position (see BIPRU 7.8.17R)

Percentage reduction (see BIPRU 7.8.28R)

Reduced net underwriting position

At initial commitment 9.00am Monday

£100m gross amount is reduced by £20m due to sales/sub-underwriting commitments confirmed in writing at the time of initial commitment (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (1)) and (4)).

=

£80m

90%

£8m

Post initial commitment 9.02am Monday

Remaining £80m is reduced by £40m due to further sales, sub-underwriting commitments obtained and allocations granted (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (2) - (5)).

=

£40m

90%

£4m

At the end of working day 1

Remaining £40m is reduced to £20m due to further sales.

=

£20m

90%

£2m

End of working day 3

Remaining £20m is reduced to £5m due to further sales.

=

£5m

75%

£1.25 m

End of working day 4

Remaining £5m is reduced to £2m due to further sales.

=

£2m

50%

£1m

End of working day 5

Remaining £2m is reduced to £1m due to further sales.

=

£1m

25%

£0.75 m

Start of working day 6

£1m remaining

=

£1m

0%

£1m

REC 2.3.3GRP
In determining whether a UK recognised body has financial resources sufficient for the proper performance of its relevant functions, the FCA5 may have regard to:5(1) the operational and other risks to which the UK recognised body is exposed;(2) if the UK recognised body guarantees the performance of transactions in specified investments, the counterparty and market risks to which it is exposed in that capacity; 5(3) the amount and composition of the UK recognised body's capital;(4)
REC 2.3.17GRP
4The financial risk assessment should be based on a methodology which provides a reasonable estimate of the potential business losses which a UK RIE might incur in stressed but plausible market conditions. The FCA5 would expect a UK RIE to carry out a financial risk assessment at least once in every twelve-month period, or more frequently if there are material changes in the nature, scale or complexity of the UK RIE's operations or its business plans that suggest such financial
ICOBS 8.4.4BGRP
[deleted]52
ICOBS 8.4.5GRP
(1) For the purposes of ICOBS 8.4.4R (2)(c) and ICOBS 8.4.4R (2)(d), a firm may put in place appropriate screening on its employers’ liability register to monitor:(a) requests for information and searches to ensure that they are being made for a legitimate purpose by persons falling into one of the categories in ICOBS 8.4.4R (2)(c); and(b) requests from tracing offices to ensure that the information is necessary, and will only be used by the tracing office, for the purposes of
DEPP 6.5A.3GRP
(1) The FCA2 may increase or decrease the amount of the financial penalty arrived at after Step 2, but not including any amount to be disgorged as set out in Step 1, to take into account factors which aggravate or mitigate the breach. Any such adjustments will be made by way of a percentage adjustment to the figure determined at Step 2.2(2) The following list of factors may have the effect of aggravating or mitigating the breach:(a) the conduct of the firm in bringing (or failing
DEPP 6.5A.4GRP
(1) If the FCA2 considers the figure arrived at after Step 3 is insufficient to deter the firm who committed the breach, or others, from committing further or similar breaches then the FCA2 may increase the penalty. Circumstances where the FCA2 may do this include:222(a) where the FCA2 considers the absolute value of the penalty too small in relation to the breach to meet its objective of credible deterrence;2(b) where previous FCA2 action in respect of similar breaches has failed
DISP 2.7.4GRP
127In determining whether an enterprise19 meets the tests for being a micro-enterprise or a small business19, account should be taken of the enterprise’s 'partner enterprises' or 'linked enterprises' (as those terms are defined in the Micro-enterprise Recommendation). For example, where a parent company holds a majority shareholding in a complainant, if the parent company does not meet the tests for being a micro-enterprise or a small business19 then neither will the complainant.
DISP 2.7.7GRP
127(1) 12718DISP 2.7.6R (5)and DISP 2.7.6R (6) include, for example, employees covered by a group permanent health policy taken out by an employer, which provides in the insurance contract that the policy was taken out for the benefit of the employee.(2) DISP 2.7.6R(2B) includes any complaint that the respondent did not do enough to prevent, or respond to, an alleged authorised push payment fraud. 18
SYSC 3.2.4GRP
(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.
SYSC 3.2.5GRP
Where it is made possible and appropriate by the nature, scale and complexity of its business, a firm should segregate the duties of individuals and departments in such a way as to reduce opportunities for financial crime or contravention of requirements and standards under the regulatory system. For example, the duties of front-office and back-office staff should be segregated so as to prevent a single individual initiating, processing and controlling transactions.
DISP 2.8.4GRP
19An example of exceptional circumstances might be where the complainant has been or is incapacitated.
DISP 2.8.8GRP
713If a complaint relates to the sale of a payment protection contract, knowledge by the complainant that there was a problem with the sale of the payment protection contract generally (for example where there has been a rejection of a claim on the grounds of ineligibility or exclusion, or the complainant has received a customer contact letter explaining that they may have been mis-sold) would not in itself ordinarily be sufficient to establish for the purposes of the three-year