View more on these topics

FCA bans and fines ex-Keydata director £350k

FCA logo new 620x430.jpg

The FCA has banned and fined former Keydata finance director Craig McNeil £350,000.

Keydata designed and sold investment products to retail investors via IFAs.

The products were underpinned by Keydata’s investment in bonds issued by Luxembourg special purpose vehicles, including one called SLS Capital.

Following Keydata’s administration in June 2009, its administrators discovered that SLS had failed to make certain payments that were due to Keydata since early 2008 and that Keydata had instead funded £4.2m in income payments to investors from its own company resources.

The FCA says McNeil was aware that Keydata continued to make the payments and failed to ensure that Keydata reported the matter to the FCA or to inform the FCA himself when he knew that the matter had not been reported.

The regulator says McNeil also failed to challenge a decision in late 2008 to enter into a complicated transaction which attempted to obtain security for the missed SLS income payments.

He permitted the release of £500,000 of Keydata’s corporate funds without having a clear understanding of the transaction or its risks. Although Keydata paid the funds to the seller, Keydata did not obtain the security.

The FCA says McNeil failed to act with due skill, care and diligence in this transaction.

FCA acting director of enforcement and market oversight Georgina Philippou says: “The FCA relies on senior directors such as McNeil to let us know about significant risks in their firms, especially when they have a direct bearing on customers’ investments.

“It was not reasonable in the circumstances for McNeil to rely on the fact that other directors might eventually tell us what was happening. If hel had acted, and acted quickly, concerns about SLS may have come to light sooner. Further, as Keydata’s finance director, McNeil should have understood the risks of the transactions he was authorising.”

McNeil agreed to settle at an early stage of the FCA’s investigation and therefore qualified for a 30 per cent discount. Were it not for this discount, he would have been fined £500,000.

In a statement, McNeil says he reported to the regulator in a March 2009 financial return the payments made by Keydata to investors from its own resources.

He says: “From 2005, the FCA had substantial involvement with Keydata’s London and Reading offices. To claim that it was my job to tell them about the operation and the products is clearly untrue.”

Keydata’s administration prompted a £326m Financial Services Compensation Scheme interim industry levy in 2011.

In May the FCA published decision notices seeking to ban and fine Keydata founder Stewart Ford, former Keydata sales director Mark Owen and former compliance officer Peter Johnson.

All three individuals have referred their decision notices to the Upper Tribunal.

Recommended

21

Neil Liversidge: The immorality of FSCS levies

Despite the anguished howls generated by the latest Financial Services Compensation Scheme levy, there is a certain reticence when it comes to questioning the moral legitimacy of the scheme itself. At this point I should make clear my belief that the FSCS should be completely separated from the protection afforded to bank deposits. I refer […]

Zurich building 480
1

Zurich ditches £5.6bn RSA bid

Zurich has been forced to pull out of a £5.6bn takeover of RSA. The Swiss firm announced a bid in July, but it has pulled out at the last minute blaming a $275m (£176m) hit resulting from explosions in the Chinese port of Tianjin , the Telegraph reports. An RSA statement says: “Zurich has confirmed […]

FCA logo glass 3 620x430
2

Tribunal rejects FCA ban for Catalyst director

The FCA has repealed its ban for former Catalyst Investment Group director Andrew Wilkins after a decision by the Upper Tribunal. In August 2013 the regulator sought to ban and fine Wilkins £100,000 over his role in the collapse of Catalyst, which is now in default. Catalyst was censured by the FCA in October 2013 […]

Ian-McKenna-in-2013-700.jpg
2

Ian McKenna: Robo-advice could squeeze out fund groups

The news that Aberdeen Asset Management is to acquire Parmenion looks a fascinating transaction for many reasons. To me it appears a very smart move. That an individual asset manager has directly bought a platform is significant in its own right but it is also worth considering the role and the value of Parmenion’s simplified […]

Guide

Guide: reporting to the Pensions Regulator — what and when?

Johnson Fleming has published a step-by-step guide demonstrating the importance of record keeping and reporting, and how it can ensure you operate a successful scheme. The guide takes you through some key questions you need to ask and identifies the information you need to obtain. The topics include: why you need to keep records and the benefits of doing this; registering your scheme; what information you need to record to ensure you meet the Pensions Regulator’s requirements; and what items need to be recorded and when.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. The FCA’s performance in this whole sorry affair has been lamentable. They were camped in Keydata’s Offices from 2005 and yet were looking the wrong way when somebody was emptying the fund. They concluded these products were high risk, but kept it to themselves until advisers and investors had invested. Then they closed down Keydata on the back of dubious financial reports by the firm that won themselves the contract, and told the world such products were ‘toxic’ so as to cause a run. The combined effect is a different level of harm for investors depending on where they invested.

    Having been shown the firm and the people who were advising the SLS fund and certifying to everyone it was solvent, the FCA messed up and missed the boat on fining him – finding themselves up against limitation.

    And to compensate, they try to make themselves look busy: forcing past business reviews from IFA firms who recommended these products in good faith, and it seems, manufacturing spurious cases against random members of the Keydata management.

    This case is particularly tenuous. Fining and banning somebody for a transaction that in fact didn’t happen, and for not reporting what was in fact on their financial returns. And yet still no heads are seen to roll at FCA for such a lamentable failure.

  2. Hard to have a lot of sympathy for him either.

  3. @MIB – Quite so and please remember that a significant cause of failure was die to a criminal act – Elias absconding with the loot.

    Advisers were held responsible for this and many PI Insurers refused to cover a criminal act!

    Now will someone please explain why this fine doesn’t go the FSCS – and indeed why they didn’t get the lolly earlier? Perhaps it might have alleviated some of the blackmail money levied on advisers by Herbert Smith in conjunction with the FSCS.

    Nincompoops doesn’t even begin to cover it.

  4. It’s taken almost as long as the Chilcott report!

Leave a comment