View more on these topics

Former AR granted appeal of High Court decision

Mark Wayman
Endowment Surrender Plus sole proprietor Mark Wayman

Former appointed representative Mark Wayman has been granted leave to appeal a high court ruling that found him liable for a misselling claim worth more than £675,000 after his principal firm’s authorisation ceased.

In a case heard in Manchester Civil Justice Centre in October, judge Mr Justice Hodge found Endowment Surrender Plus sole proprietor Wayman (pictured) missold life settlement policies to two clients, both professional trustees.

ESP was an appointed representative of Becque Wayman Investments Limited when Wayman gave the advice in 2003. He was no longer a director or shareholder in BWIL at the time.

BWIL ceased to be regulated in April 2009 and the clients lodged the complaint in November 2009.

Wayman argued the advice contract was between BWIL as the principal firm and the clients.

Hodge found that while BWIL elected to monitor and supervise ESP and was liable for the acts and omissions of ESP, the contracting parties were ESP and the clients.

The judge ordered Wayman to pay £426,000 in compensation, plus interest of 1 per cent above base rate on that amount since November 2003 and court costs of £100,000.

Wayman, who gave up his adviser authorisation in 2009, says his professional indemnity insurance was through BWIL and the firm was unable to secure run-off cover when it ceased to be authorised.

4 Pump Court barrister Anthony Speaight QC lodged the application for permission to appeal in November.

The Court of Appeal granted the application on 31 January.

Wayman says: “This is an important case and unless it can be overturned the implications potentially could affect many ARs.

“I have virtually exhausted the available assets on the costs of the defence so far, having spent over £60,000. I would be very interested to hear from any organisation or individual who may be able to help fight this appeal.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. And just who was the ‘Wayman’ in BWIL, the firm this guy was authorised by? It seems to me he is hiding behind corporate structures to avoid having to cough up! However, as he states all his personal assets have been used up to fight this case, what will the unfortunate investors get anyway. If the appeal finds against Mr Wayman, and he can’t find the funds to pay costs and compensations ordered by Mr Justice Hodge and the FSCS gets involved, then at least let him spend a considerable time in jail to contemplate his ethics in future. Only the lawyers really win.

  2. the elephant in the room 11th February 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Some of you ex-Honnister advisers ought to be watching this story unfold with interest. If Wayman pulls this off he will be your hero!

  3. Come on you lot, help the man out, stop sitting on your wallets.

Leave a comment