View more on these topics

Court again rejects bid to review FSA’s cru compensation

The High Court has rejected campaigning group Justice in Financial Services’ application for a judicial review of the FSA’s Arch cru compensation package for a second time.

An oral hearing was held at the Royal Courts of Justice in London last week after the application was initially rejected in January.
Joe Egerton, who leads JFS, filed the claim in September on behalf of Coull Money, an IFA that recommended the funds.

In June, the FSA agreed a £54m compensation package between Capita Financial Managers, BNY Mellon Trust & Depositary and HSBC Bank.

The deal was estimated to return investors around 70 per cent of the value of the funds as at March 2009 when the range was suspended, set alongside distributions already made and remaining assets. Latest valuations from Capita put this figure at 66 per cent.

Egerton says: “The FSA appears to be in a position where it can make whatever rules it likes. We are considering whether or not to appeal.”

Regulatory Legal is seeking a separate judicial review of the compensation package on behalf of 2,700 investors.

A decision on the application was expected last month but has been delayed after Regulatory Legal amended its claim in light of the £150m legal action being taken against Arch Financial Products.

Last month, the board of 18 Guernsey-listed investment vehicles accused Arch Financial, the fund manager at the centre of the Arch cru debacle, of breaches of duty in the way it managed the investment portfolio of the cell companies between July 2007 and November 2009.

Jacksons Financial Services managing director Pete Matthew says: “In an ideal world, investors would get 100 per cent of their money back but as the application for a judicial review has been rejected again, it looks like they may have to accept less.”

Recommended

Principality lending hits £1bn but profits fall

Principality Building Society lent £1bn to mortgage customers in 2011, up by 6.5 per cent on £934m in 2010, although profits fell sharply. In its annual results for 2011, published last week, the society says profits fell by 20.5 per cent from £30.8m to £24.5m. Its core tier-one capital ratio increased from 13.3 per cent […]

Extend the fixed protection deadline, says Axa Wealth

Axa Wealth is urging the Government to delay the fixed protection deadline by 12 months due to concerns about advisers’ workloads ahead of the retail distribution review and regulatory change. Last year, ministers set out sweeping changes to pension rules which saw the annual allowance for tax-privileged pension saving cut from £255,000 to £50,000 from […]

The return of emerging markets

Ewan Thompson, Head of Emerging Market Equities, Neptune Although in political terms 2016 will be remembered for the seismic shocks of the Brexit vote and Trump’s presidential victory, the year was also a watershed for the global economy and emerging markets in particular. Following five years in the wilderness, the conditions are now in place […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Enough is enough. Can we all agree now not to take seriously people that head off to court to challenge the FSA and lose. Parliament gave the FSA the powers concerned. Persuading it to reach particular decisions is perfectly reasonable. The development of lengthy caselaw that just tells us how powerful the FSA is does not help anyone.

    If you are concerned as to why I am posting this anonymously, you should be aware that I have previously given my name on this message board and walked into prolonged and rather unpleasant threats from one of the ‘culprits’ of being sued for libel – a claim with even less chance of success than the ones referred to here.

Leave a comment