View more on these topics

IFA Centre kick-starts Capita legal battle for further Arch cru redress

Trade body IFA Centre has kick-started its legal challenge against Capita Financial Managers to secure redress for Arch cru investors who are not covered by the consumer redress scheme.

Law firm Harcus Sinclair has written to Capita, the authorised corporate director of the Arch cru fund range, to notify them of a claim against the company based on a sample of Arch cru investors.

Over 800 Arch cru investors have so far registered their interest in taking part in the litigation against Capita.

The next stage will be to apply for a group litigation order to claim for losses incurred by execution-only investors, clients of discretionary managers, those whose losses exceed £150,000 and professional trustee investors.

These groups of investors are not covered by the regulator’s Arch cru consumer redress scheme, which began on 1 April, which requires advisers to review recommendations to invest in Arch cru where consumers opt in to the scheme.

Capita wrote to investors last month to remind them they have until 31 December to apply for a redress under a separate £54m payment scheme agreed by the FSA between Capita and depositaries HSBC and BNY Mellon in June 2011.

IFA Centre managing director Gill Cardy has criticised Capita for the way it has communicated the payment scheme and the latest net asset values of the Arch cru funds.

She says: “Averaging the return from all six funds to quote an average investor return is totally inappropriate, and ignores the fact that most investors invested at significantly higher incorrect fund prices. The 25 per cent of investors totally ignored by the ‘industry-wide’ redress scheme should refuse to accept that a return of 60 per cent of capital invested is somehow an acceptable outcome.”

IFA Centre announced its potential legal action against Capita in March


ABI suggests sweeping plans to protect London’s reputation

The Association of British Insurers has unveiled plans to shake up the rules surrounding London’s listing requirements to protect the City’s reputation as a leading financial centre. In its Encouraging Equity Investment report, the ABI argues for a number of changes to initial public offerings, listing requirements and broker and banker fees in order to […]

FCA admits concerns over BoI rate hike

The Financial Conduct Authority has revealed concern about the Bank of Ireland’s mortgage rate hike and is working with the lender to help consumers. In a letter to Treasury select committee chair Andrew Tyrie, dated 20 May but only published this week, FCA chief executive Martin Wheatley says its powers are restricted because all mortgages […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. As the LBA to Capita is written on an open basis, I assume there is no copy suggesting people share and read: –

    If you have clients who invested in these funds, you’ll want to ensure they join this action rather than try and claim against you. Moreover, too many clients are too decent to claim against their trusted advisers, and under the FS/CA scheme would go without(!) UNLESS they join this action.

    If you didn’t advise clients to invest in ARCH cru, but know investors in them anyway, its still in your interests (and your clients) to join this action: being compensated by Capita means the cost not falling on IFAs generally via the FSCS.

    And don’t let anyone tell you that Capita can only ‘afford’ the paltry redress scheme. It is unfeasible that such an organisation, with £hundreds of millions derived from public sector contracts, could use a legal technicality to avoid its financial services liabilities and still remain standing.

  2. Richard Wright 9th July 2013 at 10:03 am

    I thought IFA center was a trade body set up to represent IFA’s as an alternative to AIFA (as was). No Wonder Gill Cardy didnt have time to look at important issues I brought to her attention last year regarding RDR, she was obviously far too busy trying to become a consumer champion. Gill leave that to WHICH and the like and concentrate on your members interests!!

  3. @Richard Wright : I am sorry that you are unable to see why holding Capita to account for their failings would benefit the adviser community which is currently being asked to pick up the bill, whether they used the funds or not.
    The focus on investors underlines the fact that whether investors took advice or not, or whether that advice was good or not, their losses are just the same and just as real and should be addressed by CFML as the party resposible for causing those losses, not the advisers who are not.
    If this case succeeds you will I am sure find a little corner of your heart to be grateful – whether you are a member or not.

  4. @Richard. Are you a member of IFACentre? APFA? Been a member of Adviser Alliance, IFADU? Who is your SPS issued by? If you can confirm the above it would be useful before I respond.

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