View more on these topics

Sole trader stripped of permissions after mishandling investment

The FSA has removed all regulated activities from the permissions of Michael Robert Cameron, trading as Fidelity Corporate Services, after he failed to return a client’s investment of £175,000.

The FSA says that the sole trader arranged a high yield bond worth £175,000 for a client in June 2007. Cameron initially paid interest on the investment but failed to provide the client with documentation in relation to his investment.

In July 2008, the client requested that his principal investment be returned.

Cameron has failed to repay the investment, without explanation, and has not met with the FSA to discuss the transaction.

The FSA says by failing to respond adequately, or at all, to its requests for an explanation of the situation, Cameron is in breach of Principle 11 of the FSA’s Principles for Businesses.

Cameron can no longer advise on investments or regulated mortgage contracts, carry on a regulated activity and arrange deals in investments or regulated mortgage contracts.

Recommended

1

Folly of resistance

The vast majority of advisers are getting to grips with the retail distribution review challenges but there is a small vociferous minority, dubbed in a recent survey as “steadfast rejecters” who are starting to fully realise the consequences of their inaction.

Second financial planning week

The Institute of Financial Planning is holding its second annual Financial Planning Week to raise consumer awareness. It will run from September 7 to 13.

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. Martyn Sinclair 21st August 2009 at 3:24 pm

    and……….
    so…….. only half a story has been reported. Has the client got his money back, has the client been able to claim via a compensartion scheme and what has happened to Mr. Cameron?? Waiting for Part 2..

  2. Double standards again!
    The FSA appears to have acted correctly in ‘striking off’ Mr Cameron. While only having sketchy details, any action, or inaction in this way is totally unacceptable.

    Would the FSA please treat the Banks in the same way?

    When was the last time that the FSA removed permissions from a Bank or Bank employee?

    The FSA has been beating the drum telling small firms that it is going to come down on them very hard whenever they step out of line. OK fair enough but why single out small firms and sole traders? The FSA has ample evidence that the Banks generate the majority of complaints to the FOS and the majority of those complaints (more than 60% I believe) are upheld, unlike the complaints against small firms (a miniscule number compared to the Banks) where only about 30% are upheld.

    Still the FSA trots out that all firms are treated with the same regulatory rigour.

    This is obviously nonsense, in the face of evidence of wrongdoing in Bank advice bordering on malfeasance all that we get is statements saying that this will be taken up in the normal course of regulatory discussions with those Banks.

    One standard for the small firms and no standards for the Banks.

  3. In response to Martyn Sinclair I’ll shed some light into it. I had some dealings with Mr Cameron and was astonished at the information I have read regarding the alleged non returning of a client’s investment of £175,000. After my own investigations it turns out that the allegation made by the client was wholly false and without foundation. Not only that I have also found out that the client in question has been arrested and is being investigated by the police authorities in relation to making this false allegation and other matters . Strange how this half of the story has not hit the news..My take on this story is to never assume that anything is true unless you are party to the facts.

Leave a comment