View more on these topics

Collapsed IFA firm sees FSCS claims continue

A further £300,000 in claims roll in after alledged rogue adviser caused firm to fold

Business-People-Leaving-Walking-Falling-Decline-Corporate-700x450.jpgAn advice firm that collapsed after a rogue adviser allegedly missold unregulated investments continues to see redress claims paid out by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme nearly two years after it was wound down.

Last month, Money Marketing wrote a cover story on the firm, Central Investment Services (Aberdeen), which was declared in default by the FSCS in 2015 after a former director of the company, John Moore, missold unregulated investments without authorisation, according to insolvency reports.

Who pays for bad advice? Unraveling an IFA firm collapse

A November 2016 insolvency report noted that creditors were unlikely to get their money back as professional indemnity insurance was probably not pay out, the firm could not easily dispose of its shares in platform Nucleus.

A court decree for £225,000 was successfully obtained against Moore’s assets, but the insolvency practitioners said it was “unlikely any funds will be available for distribution to ordinary creditors”.

At the time, the FSCS had paid out just over £1m on 30 successful claims against the firm. (21 further claims had been rejected).

That figure has now risen to £1.4m, with 40 successful claims against the firm, according to the latest data obtained by Money Marketing.

The FSCS did not provide details on claims that had been rejected.

Central Investment Services (Scotland) continues to provide advice after it changed the name of its official corporate entity.

Recommended

Treasury looks to address advice gap

By Jamie Clark, Business Development Manager, Royal London Hot on the heels of consultations on tax relief and pension transfers and early-exit charges comes a new investigation into the advice gap, and how this can be bridged. Ever since the new pensions freedoms were introduced, concerns have been raised about how people can get access […]

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. Neil Liversidge 3rd July 2017 at 4:41 pm

    Is it bad advice or is it securities fraud? Were the ‘investments’ bought by the client AIM shares bought up on the cheap by the ‘adviser’or an associate of his? I am investigating just such a case and have been for some time. Why? Because the cops and FCA can’t be bothered, apparently. (Action Fraud = INActio Fraud). That’s where the FSCS money goes – compensating ‘advice’ that was never anything of the sort. Is the FSCS pressing for such investigations? If not, why not? It’s OUR money Mr Neale (Mark Neale – FSCS) and we’re entitled to have it used properly, especially given that it’s compulsorily extracted from us. What a racket. In the US the SEC, New York DA and/or FBI would be all over it. Here the snoring of our ‘guardians’ rattles the windows. Wakey wakey regulators and law ‘enforcers’. Is there anybody there?

Leave a comment