View more on these topics

Letter to the editor: Long-running court battle continues

Money Marketing readers may recall my long-running fight against the FSA, which I am suing under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 because the FSA, FSCS and FOS worked together to unfairly progress loss assessments and solicit pension complaints from former clients.

The FSA has twice applied for the case to be dismissed, despite a judge ruling my case is “better than merely arguable” and has “a real prospect of success”. No decision has been handed down for the FSA’s latest strike out attempt, which was heard in November.

In the meantime, I have secured a judicial review against the FOS concerning a related £48,000 pension award on a case which was referred by FSA in July 2005. The investor declined to complain to me and the FOS denied me an oral hearing. The FOS progressed it to a final uphold decision on 23 February 2012.

I am seeking an order from the court to quash the decision, plus an award for damages and costs I have incurred.

The public hearing for the judicial review is scheduled for 8 May at the Royal Courts of Justice on the Strand in London. Any advisers who are able to attend the hearing would be welcome.

John Calland

Recommended

FCA bans two brokers over fraudulent mortgage applications

The Financial Conduct Authority has banned two former directors of a Glasgow-based mortgage brokerage for submitting fraudulent mortgage applications. Douglas Jones and his son Derek Jones, of Which Mortgage, have been banned after the regulator found they failed to ensure the firm had appropriate controls when submitting mortgage applications. Douglas Jones has also been fined […]

1

FCA bans two brokers over fraudulent mortgage applications

The Financial Conduct Authority has banned two former directors of a Glasgow-based mortgage brokerage for submitting fraudulent mortgage applications. Douglas Jones and his son Derek Jones, of Which Mortgage, have been banned after the regulator found they failed to ensure the firm had appropriate controls when submitting mortgage applications. Douglas Jones has also been fined […]

Hargreaves looks to lower minimum advice threshold to £20k for phone-based advice

Hargreaves Lansdown is looking at reducing the minimum investment required to access its telephone-based advice service from £50,000 to £20,000.Hargreaves head of advice Danny Cox says: “We are looking at whether we could make it a viable business opportunity; early indications suggest we can.”There has been a spate of exits from mass-market advice recently, including […]

Laurence Baxter MM blog

Laurence Baxter: FCA will take a more holistic view of mortgages

The Financial Conduct Authority’s first Financial Risk Outlook and Business Plan highlight time and again the regulator’s intended new approach to its overall role, all of which will affect all those working in the mortgage market. You can expect the FCA to be a more proactive and interventionist regulator. The Business Plan describes a supervisory […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

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

  1. Good luck with this latest case John.
    It is simply beyond belief, that a case which was heard in November, has not been ruled upon.
    What on earth is the judge doing?
    It is lamentable that, instead of enjoying your retirement, you have had to deal with these legal matters, which must prove stressful to say the least.
    If you were Hornby or Crosby, you would have been given preferential treatment.
    It is a joke that the regulator wants to pursue advisers to the grave, yet wants no responsibility to fall at it’s own feet, as admitted by sir sants to the TSC.
    Keep us posted John, as this represents all of us, in that we are up against an unelected unaccountable quango which should have no place in a so called democracy.

  2. Any update on how this went?

  3. What happened John?

  4. Like so many of these applications, it failed.

  5. The application was dismissed. It was based on the fact not that FOS had progressed the complaints but that this had taken too long. The Judge rejected on this on the basis that most of the delays had been caused by Calland. Since the actual adviser did not recall the case, there wasn’t a great deal of point in holding a hearing. The judgement ought to be compulsory reading for people commenting about FOS. It appears at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/1327.html.

    I’m sorry for the anonymity but previous posts about cases on this site have produced libel threats.

  6. So how come it took the judge 6 months to figure it out?

Leave a comment

Close

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

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com