Related provisions for BIPRU 7.8.4

1 - 20 of 66 items.

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).

If a firm has an irrevocable and unfettered right to withdraw from an underwriting commitment, exercisable within a certain period, the commitment commences (and thus the time of initial commitment occurs) when that right expires.
For the purposes of BIPRU 7.8working day 0 is the business day on which a firm that is underwriting or sub-underwriting becomes unconditionally committed to accepting a known quantity of securities at a specified price.
For debt issues and securities which are issued in a similar manner, working day 0 is the later of the date on which the securities are allotted and the date on which payment for them is due.
For equity issues and securities which are issued in a similar manner, working day 0 is the later of the date on which the offer becomes closed for subscriptions and the date on which the allocations are made public.
For rights issues, working day 0 is the first day after the date on which the offer becomes closed to acceptances for subscription.
A firm must not apply any advanced prudential calculation approach for the purposes of this chapter unless it has an advanced prudential calculation approach permission and that advanced prudential calculation approach permission requires the firm to use that advanced prudential calculation approach for those purposes.
BIPRU 1.3 (Applications for advanced approaches) deals with how to apply for an advanced prudential calculation approach permission.
Even if a firm has an advanced prudential calculation approach permission that allows it to use an advanced prudential calculation approach for the purposes of this chapter, the firm may not use the requirements of another state or territory to the extent they provide for that advanced prudential calculation approach. Therefore a firm may not use BIPRU 8.7.34 R and 2BIPRU 8.7.37 R2 (Use of the capital requirements of another EEA competent authority)2 if that would involve using
SYSC 12.1.10RRP
The internal control mechanisms referred to in SYSC 12.1.8 R must include:(1) mechanisms that are adequate for the purpose of producing any data and information which would be relevant for the purpose of monitoring compliance with any prudential requirements (including any reporting requirements and any requirements relating to capital adequacy, solvency, systems and controls and large exposures):(a) to which the firm is subject with respect to its membership of a group; or(b)
SYSC 12.1.13RRP
If this rule applies under SYSC 12.1.14 R to a firm, the firm must:(1) comply with SYSC 12.1.8R (2) in relation to any UK consolidation group or non-EEAsub-group of which it is a member, as well as in relation to its group; and(2) ensure that the risk management processes and internal control mechanisms at the level of any UK consolidation group or non-EEAsub-group of which it is a member comply with the obligations set out in the following provisions on a consolidated (or sub-consolidated)
SYSC 12.1.20GRP
In some cases the management of the systems and controls used to address the risks described in SYSC 12.1.8R (1) may be organised on a group-wide basis. If the firm is not carrying out those functions itself, it should delegate them to the group members that are carrying them out. However, this does not relieve the firm of responsibility for complying with its obligations under SYSC 12.1.8R (1). A firm cannot absolve itself of such a responsibility by claiming that any breach
SYSC 12.1.21GRP
SYSC 12.1.8R (1) deals with the systems and controls that a firm should have in respect of the exposure it has to the rest of the group. On the other hand, the purpose of SYSC 12.1.8R (2) and the rules in this section that amplify it is to require groups to have adequate systems and controls. However a group is not a single legal entity on which obligations can be imposed. Therefore the obligations have to be placed on individual firms. The purpose of imposing the obligations
(1) This paragraph gives guidance on some of the terms used in the overall Pillar 2 rule.(2) Insurance risk refers to the inherent uncertainties as to the occurrence, amount and timing of insurance liabilities.(3) Interest rate risk in the non-trading book is explained in BIPRU 2.3 (Interest rate risk in the non-trading book).(4) In a narrow sense, business risk is the risk to a firm that it suffers losses because its income falls or is volatile relative to its fixed cost base.
1A firm should also 6assess the risks that may 6increase its current funding 6obligations towards the pension scheme and 6that might lead to the firm not being able to pay its other liabilities as they fall due.
A firm may wish to consider the following scenarios:(1) one in which the firm gets into difficulties with an effect on its ability to fund the pension scheme; and(2) one in which the pension scheme position deteriorates (for example, because investment returns fall below expected returns or because of increases in life expectancy) with an effect on the firm's funding obligations; taking into account the management actions the firm could and would take.
6A firm is expected to determine where the scope of any stress test impacts upon its pension obligation risk and estimate how the relevant measure of pension obligation risk will change in the scenario in question. For example, in carrying out stress tests under GENPRU 1.2.42 R a firm must consider how a stress scenario, such as an economic recession, would impact on the firm's current obligations towards its pension scheme and any potential increase in those obligations. Risks
A firm should consider issues such as:(1) the extent to which trustees of the pension scheme or a pension regulator (such as the one created under the Pensions Act 2004) can compel a certain level of contributions or a one-off payment in adverse financial situations or in order to meet the minimum legal requirements under the scheme's trust deed and rules or under the applicable laws relating to the pension scheme;(2) whether the valuation bases used to set pension scheme contribution
1A common platform firm must:(1) when relying on a third party for the performance of operational functions which are critical for the performance of regulated activities, listed activities or ancillary services (in this chapter "relevant services and activities") on a continuous and satisfactory basis, ensure that it takes reasonable steps to avoid undue additional operational risk; (2) not undertake the outsourcing of important operational functions in such a way as to impair
For the purposes of this chapter an operational function is regarded as critical or important if a defect or failure in its performance would materially impair the continuing compliance of a common platform firm with the conditions and obligations of its authorisation or its other obligations under the regulatory system, or its financial performance, or the soundness or the continuity of its relevant services and activities.[Note: article 13(1) of the MiFID implementing Direc
If a firm outsources critical or important operational functions or any relevant services and activities, it remains fully responsible for discharging all of its obligations under the regulatory system and must comply, in particular, with the following conditions:2(1) the outsourcing must not result in the delegation by senior personnel of their responsibility;(2) the relationship and obligations of the firm towards its clients under the regulatory system must not be altered;(3)
SYSC 13.9.1GRP
As SYSC 3.2.4 G explains, a firm cannot contract out its regulatory obligations and should take reasonable care to supervise the discharge of outsourced functions. This section provides additional guidance on managing outsourcing arrangements (and will be relevant, to some extent, to other forms of third party dependency) in relation to operational risk. Outsourcing may affect a firm's exposure to operational risk through significant changes to, and reduced control over, people,
SYSC 13.9.4GRP
Before entering into, or significantly changing, an outsourcing arrangement, a firm should:(1) analyse how the arrangement will fit with its organisation and reporting structure; business strategy; overall risk profile; and ability to meet its regulatory obligations;(2) consider whether the agreements establishing the arrangement will allow it to monitor and control its operational risk exposure relating to the outsourcing;(3) conduct appropriate due diligence of the service
SYSC 13.9.5GRP
In negotiating its contract with a service provider, a firm should have regard to:(1) reporting or notification requirements it may wish to impose on the service provider;(2) whether sufficient access will be available to its internal auditors, external auditors or actuaries (see section 341 of the Act) and to the FSA (see SUP 2.3.5 R (Access to premises) and SUP 2.3.7 R (Suppliers under material outsourcing arrangements);(3) information ownership rights, confidentiality agreements
This chapter (the custody rules) applies to a firm:21(1) [deleted]22(a) [deleted]22(b) [deleted]22(1A) 2when it holds financial instruments belonging to a client in the course of its MiFID business; and/or(1B) 2when it is safeguarding and administering investments, in the course of business that is not MiFID business.(2) [deleted]22
CASS 6.1.24GRP
The custody rules also, where relevant,2 implement the provisions of MiFID which regulate the obligations of a firm when it holds financial instruments belonging to a client in the course of its MiFID business.2
The FSA does not assume that all portfolios are sensitive to downturns. The FSA also accepts that for some portfolios, particularly in unsecured lending, the impact of the material drivers on LGD may be weak. However the burden is on the firm to demonstrate that its models are appropriate for the circumstances in which they are applied.
In the FSA's view a sub-portfolio consisting of credit card or overdraft obligations will usually meet the condition in BIPRU 4.6.44 R (2)(f). In the FSA's view it is unlikely that any other type of retail exposure will do so. If a firm wishes to apply the treatment in BIPRU 4.6.44 R (1) to product types other than credit card or overdraft obligations it should first discuss this with the FSA.
A firm must provide its own estimates of LGDs in accordance with its IRB permission and the minimum IRB standards.[Note: BCD Article 87(7) (part)]
A firm must provide its own estimates of conversion factors in accordance with its IRB permission and the minimum IRB standards.[Note: BCD Article 87(7) (part)]
In relation to the obligation to substitute described in GENPRU 2.2.129R (2), a firm must take all reasonable steps to ensure that it has at all times authorised and unissued capital instruments which are core tier one capital8 (and the authority to issue them) sufficient to discharge its obligation to substitute.8
(1) This rule deals with any transaction:(a) under which an SPV directly or indirectly funds the subscription for capital issued by the firm as described in GENPRU 2.2.124 R; or(b) that is directly or indirectly funded by a transaction in (1)(a).(2) Each undertaking that is a party to a transaction to which this rule applies (other than the firm) must be a subsidiary undertaking of the firm.(3) Each SPV that is a party to a transaction to which this rule applies must comply with
For the purposes of GENPRU 2.2.159R (5) the debt agreement or terms of the instrument should not contain any clause which might require early repayment of the debt (e.g. cross default clauses, negative pledges and restrictive covenants). A cross default clause is a clause which says that the loan goes into default if any of the borrower's other loans go into default. It is intended to prevent one creditor being repaid before other creditors, e.g. obtaining full repayment through
A tier two instrument may be redeemable at the option of the firm, but any term of the instrument providing for the firm to have the right to exercise such an option must not provide for that right to be exercisable earlier than the fifth anniversary of the date of issue of the instrument.
The effective segregation of duties is an important element in the internal controls of a firm in the prudential context. In particular, it helps to ensure that no one individual is completely free to commit a firm's assets or incur liabilities on its behalf. Segregation can also help to ensure that a firm'sgoverning body receives objective and accurate information on financial performance, the risks faced by the firm and the adequacy of its systems.
A firm must arrange for orderly records to be kept of its business and internal organisation, including all services and transactions undertaken by it, which must be sufficient to enable the FSA or any other relevant competent authority under MiFID or the UCITS Directive4 to monitor the firm's compliance with the requirements under the regulatory system, and in particular to ascertain that the firm has complied with all obligations with respect to clients.[Note: article 13(6)
Exposures fully and completely secured, to the satisfaction of the firm, by shares in Finnish residential housing companies, operating in accordance with the Finnish Housing Company Act of 1991 or subsequent equivalent legislation, in respect of residential property which is or shall be occupied or let by the owner must be assigned a risk weight of 35%.[Note: BCD Annex VI Part 1 point 46]
The Banking Consolidation Directive permits a competent authority to disapply the condition in BIPRU 3.4.60 R (3), if it has evidence that a well-developed and long-established residential real estate market is present in its territory with loss rates which are sufficiently low to justify such treatment. BIPRU 3.4.61 R implements that option. However, if the evidence changes so that these conditions are no longer satisfied, the FSA may be obliged to revoke BIPRU 3.4.61 R.
In particular, if a firm applies BIPRU 3.4.91 R or BIPRU 3.4.92 R, it must comply with the corresponding CRD implementation measures in relation to points 54-56 of Part 1 of Annex VI of the Banking Consolidation Directive.[Note: BCD Annex VI Part 1 points 54 to 56]
(1) The authorised fund manager operates the scheme on a day-to-day basis. Its operation is determined by the rules in this chapter, which require appropriate powers in the instrument constituting the scheme or refer to the need to state the relevant operating procedures in the prospectus of the scheme.(2) The authorised fund manager does not necessarily have to carry out all the activities it is responsible for and may delegate functions to other persons. The rules in this chapter
SUP 21.1.4GRP
In particular, clause 4 of the form of waiver in SUP 21 Annex 1 will not ordinarily be inserted in waivers for energy market participants that will not, at the time the waiver will take effect, clearly satisfy the conditions set out in that clause. For these purposes the FSA will take into account the relative proportions of the energy market participant's assets and revenues that are referable to the various parts of its business, as well as to any other factor that the FSA considers
MCOB 2.8 provides details of the standard expected of firms where there is an obligation in MCOB requiring firms to maintain adequate records to evidence compliance. An overall view of the record keeping requirements in MCOB is in MCOB Sch 1.
This chapter is also intended to remind credit unions that the Senior Management Arrangements, Systems and Controls sourcebook (SYSC) also contains a number of high level rules relating to senior management arrangements, systems and controls designed to have general application to all firms, including credit unions. SYSC 1 and SYSC 4 to SYSC 10 apply to all credit unions in respect of the carrying on of their regulated activities and unregulated activities in a prudential context.
(1) A non-UCITS retail scheme operating as a FAIF must not invest in units in schemes in COLL 5.7.7R (1) to (3) (‘second schemes’) unless the authorised fund manager has carried out appropriate due diligence on each of the second schemes and:(a) is satisfied, on reasonable grounds and after making all reasonable enquiries, that each of the second schemes complies with relevant legal and regulatory requirements;(b) has taken reasonable care to determine that:(i) the property of
COLL 5.7.11GRP
An authorised fund manager carrying out due diligence for the purpose of the rules in this section should make enquiries or otherwise obtain information needed to enable him properly to consider:(1) whether the experience, expertise, qualifications and professional standing of the second scheme's investment manager is adequate for the type and complexity of the second scheme;(2) the adequacy of the regulatory, legal and accounting regimes applicable to the second scheme and its
SUP 12.6.1ARRP
7A firm that is a principal of a tied agent that is an appointed representative must monitor the activities of that tied agent so as to ensure the firm complies with obligations imposed under MiFID (or equivalent obligations relating to the equivalent business of a third country investment firm) when acting through that tied agent.[Note: paragraph 3 of Article 23(2) of MiFID]
MAR 1.2.6ERP
In the opinion of the FSA , the following factors are to be taken into account in determining whether or not refraining from action amounts to behaviour which satisfies section 118(1)(a) of the Act and are indications that it does:(1) if the person concerned has failed to discharge a legal or regulatory obligation (for example to make a particular disclosure) by refraining from acting; or(2) if the person concerned has created a reasonable expectation of
MAR 1.2.16ERP
In the opinion of the FSA , a factor which indicates that there is a pending order or bid3 for a client is, if a person is approached by another in relation to a transaction, and:(1) the transaction is not immediately executed on an arm's length basis in response to a price quoted by that person; and(2) the person concerned has taken on a legal or regulatory obligation relating to the manner or timing of the execution of the transaction.
For independent price verification, where independent pricing sources are not available or pricing sources are more subjective (for example, only one available broker quote), prudent measures such as valuation adjustments may be appropriate.
Reconciliation differences under GENPRU 1.3.34 R should not be reflected in the valuations under GENPRU 1.3 but should be disclosed to the FSA in prudential returns.10Firms which are subject to the reporting requirement under SUP 16.16 should disclose those reconciliation differences in the Prudent Valuation Return which they are required to submit to the FSA under SUP 16.16.4 R.