View more on these topics

FSCS rules out compensation for Rockingham ARM investors


Rockingham Independent clients who invested in a troubled Luxembourg-based life settlement vehicle will not receive compensation for their losses from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

ARM Asset Backed Securities issued bonds based on life settlement policies without the appropriate permissions which were sold to investors in the UK and Europe. The UK distributor of ARM products was Catalyst Investment Group which sold the bonds via a number of IFAs, including Rockingham.

Out of the 2,000 UK investors that invested a total of £75m into ARM, at least 200 sales were advised by Rockingham.

Rockingham was placed into liquidation on 30 March. In August the FSCS said it was investigating whether it had a role to play in compensating Rockingham clients, and declared Rockingham in default in November. As ARM is not authorised by the FSA investors are not covered by the FSCS, but can still bring claims against the adviser who recommended the bonds.

In an update for Rockingham customers published today, the FSCS says it is unable to uphold claims in relation to ARM investments.

The FSCS says in order for it to pay compensation, it must be satisfied a claimant would have been likely to win a court case against Rockingham if it was still trading.

The FSCS says: “Whilst we accept Rockingham may potentially have given bad investment advice to some investors in respect of ARM investments, we do not consider such advice can properly be said to have caused the losses which investors may have suffered.”

It goes on to explain that it believes the legal cause of investor losses was not inappropriate advice but the decision of the Luxembourg regulator to reject ARM’s application for authorisation, which Rockingham was not legally responsible for warning investors about.

The FSCS adds: “For these reasons, the FSCS believes Rockingham does not owe a civil liability to investors and accordingly we are unable to uphold claims.”

The FSA fined Rockingham £35,000 in September 2011 and imposed partial bans on its directors over sales of ARM bonds and unregulated collective investment schemes.  

Rockingham tended to recommend investment in its retirement income tri-investment product, known as Rita, which was a 10 year annuity wrapped in a Sipp. The ARM bond was one of Rita’s underlying investments.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 6 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. How does this logic read across to the SLS part of Keydata where it is reported £100m was stolen…

    Yet IFAs were deemed culpable for that loss for other tenuous reasons as far as FSCS/HS seem to believe?

  2. So regulators causing losses to people they are supposed to protect! Priceless !

  3. If the FSCS take this approach re ARM then I cannot for the life of me see how they can take a different approach with Lifemark or SLS. The FSCS need to explain.

  4. So why are the FSCS (iFA’s) paying out claims from bust Spread Betting and Stock Broking firms????

  5. FSCS is a law unto itself. It is unregulated, other than by its begetter which does not regulate it in any meaningful wayFSA says it cannot intervene in particular cases so what does it do when it sees FSCS failures in order to remedy those failures. Not a lot it seems. The poster above who refers to logic should understand that logic & FSCS is a contradiction in terms.

  6. As a complete layman who was advised to put half of his retirement fund into ARM by Rockingham, who scoured the internet to find anything bad about this company before trusting them, I would really like to know what more I could have done to avoid having my money stolen by these fraudsters. What on earth is the point of taxpayers supporting useless organisations like the FSA and the FSCS when all they seem to do is protect the interests of the fraudsters who now apparently control our country? Why am I constantly hearing government ministers and so-called experts tell us how we must invest more in pensions when the bodies they maintain are happy to let us have our money stolen by fraudsters? Why do I have to pay for bonuses for useless bankers who create financial chaos? Why are banks supported unquestioningly whilst fraudsters are encouraged to steal our pensions by these apparently useless organisations?

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm