View more on these topics

Barclays fined £75m for overcharging clients

barclays-building-2012-700x450.jpg

Barclays has landed a $97m (£75m) bill from the Securities and Exchange Commission for overcharging clients on advisory services and fund sales.

The payment includes a $49.8m refund plus $13.8m in interest and a $30m penalty. An additional $3.5m will go to advisory clients who invested in third-party investment strategies that underperformed while going unmonitored.

The SEC found Barclays charged 2,000 clients for due diligence and monitoring of investment services that was not carried out as represented.

Barclays has also been caught recommending more expensive share classes to clients when cheaper options were available.

Additionally, the bank was found to have charged 22,138 clients excess fees due to miscalculations and billing errors.

SEC co-chief of the enforcement division’s asset management unit C Dabney O’Riordan says:  “Barclays failed to ensure that clients were receiving the services they were paying for. Each set of clients who were harmed are being refunded through the settlement.”

CEO weathers stormy AGM

The settlement came as Barclays chief executive faced calls from shareholders to resign at the company’s AGM.

In April, it was revealed the FCA and the Prudential Regulation Authority are investigating Jes Staley and the bank after he tried to find out the author of a 2016 whistleblowing letter.

The Financial Times reports angry shareholders questioned the “moral calibre” of the bank at yesterday’s AGM and said it “beggars belief” that Staley was not aware of whisteblower procedures.

Thirteen per cent of shareholders withheld their vote for Staley’s re-election, while 2.4 per cent voted against him. Proxy adviser ISS had advised clients against voting for Staley.

Recommended

barclays-building-2012-700x450.jpg
7

FCA investigates Barclays boss over whistleblowing case

Barclays is docking pay for chief executive Jes Staley after he broke regulations by trying to identify an internal whistleblower. The lender has given Staley a formal reprimand and a “very significant” hit to his compensation, according to the Financial Times. The FCA and the Prudential Regulation Authority are also investigating Staley and his employer […]

10

SJP client wins redress over ongoing advice charges

SJP ups compensation for client after she struggles to get hold of adviser despite paying ongoing fees A client of St James’s Place has won redress after complaining she was charged for ongoing advice but had only met her adviser twice in five years. Sue Preece-Murray told The Sunday Times that ongoing advice charges from […]

Data-Corporate-Finance-Business-Pen-Graph-Growth-700x450.jpg
3

Investment advice complaints reach over 17,000

Data from the FCA shows complaints related to investment advice totalled over 17,000 in the second half of 2016. The number of complaints against personal investment firms, which include advisers, rose nearly 10,000 from 23,300 to 33,200. Complaints regarding advising, selling and arranging of investments totalled just over 17,000, while decumulation and pensions complaints stood […]

4

Mike Morrison: DB transfers have finally hit the mainstream

On the days I work from home, I am often able to drop my daughter off at school around the corner. Last week, mission accomplished, I was just about to stroll home when one of the other dads sidled up to me for a word. He wanted to confirm I still dealt with pensions and […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Take note FCA. Once you’ve finalised your logo obviously.

  2. I suspect that there’s been a lot of double charging going on – charging a fee for advice and then also receiving commission from full fat share classes.

    I reviewed a high street bank ‘wealth’ DFM portfolio held in Trust last year and it still had lots of full fat funds despite them charging initial fees, ongoing fees and an exit fee! The costs were eye watering and the portfolio wasn’t held tax effectively neither and was therefore full of CGT. Oh, and a risk assessment hadn’t been done nor the ‘adviser’ heard from since the assets were settled into trust circa 10 years previously.

    There are lots of elephants in the room and yet stuff like this still continues.

Leave a comment