Abstract
The article analyses the enforcement actions taken by the Financial Conduct Authority against a financial Firm F.1 Market for a violation related to Article 24, M.I.F.I.D. concerns general principles and information to clients.
The Firm was offering C.F.D.s, complex financial derivative products, allowing investors to trade short-term positions and commodities products.
The Financial Conduct Authority in force of article 196 Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 within the First supervision notice has imposed to the Firm to:
In conclusion, the author extracts the best practice applicable to avoid enforcement actions.
1. Fact
2. Regulation landscape
3. The violation
4. The supervisory notice procedure
5. Best practices
1. Fact
The Firm registered in Cyprus was operating primarily through websites:
and was offering CFDs, a complex financial derivative product.
The Contract for Differences C.F.D. is a financial contract that pays the differences in the settlement price between open and closing trades.
Those contracts allow investors to trade the direction of securities over the very short-term and are especially popular in F.X. and commodities products.
Unlikely other Firm, this one was advertising its product in the market within modalities not-conform to the principal regulations, utilising inappropriate messages through its website like:
All those communications represent a violation of the regulations described below.
2. The regulatory landscape
The Firm authorised since 2015 as an investment firm with Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, in 2016 have obtained permission to conduct cross-border services to the UK under M.I.F.I.D. legislation for investment services involving financial C.F.D.s.
Under this regime, the Firm must comply with the conduct of business requirements of M.I.F.I.D., as transposed into Cypriot law.
When it comes to clients’ communication, the Firm must adhere to Article 24 of M.I.F.I.D., which concerns general principles on how to inform clients.
The article requires that,
Furthermore, under the terms of M.I.F.I.D., investment firms must assess the compatibility of the financial instruments with the needs of their clients, and ensure that the financial instruments are offered or recommended only when this is in the interest of the client.
Instead, the company marketing material was not fair, not clear, and misleading.
3. The Violation
The Authority stated that the Firm has failed to carry out appropriate assessments of the compatibility of its products with its customers, and it has engaged in highly inappropriate sales practices.
To reach this conclusion, the Financial Conduct Authority analysed 68 customers complaints, expressing concern about the Firm, for a period from 9 October 2018 to May 2020.
Clients complaints were related to:
However, the final supervisory notice has been served after careful evaluation.
At first instance, the Authority has notified the Cyprus Security Exchange Commission (CySEC) of the situation, expecting them to take some action.
In the absence of response or action, the Authority has informed CySEC of its intention to exercise the power of intervention, accordingly, with article 196 -197 Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, applying the restrictive measure of
4. The supervisory notice procedure
The procedure state in the Financial Service and Markets Act 2000 allow the firm ex. Article 197 to make oral argument or take actions in front of the competent Authority, in defence of a supervisory notice that requires a regulated firm to do something or not to do something.
Unlike a warning notice or decision notice, the action set out in a supervisory notice can take effect immediately or on a date set out in the notice (in this case, 18 June).
The Firm has then a minimum of 14 days to respond to a first supervisory notice or, take it to Court by referring it to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days of receiving it.
The Upper Tribunal has the power to suspend the effect of a supervisory notice.
5. Best practice
The first supervision notice elevates against the Firm also contain an indication about what must be considered best practice.
The Firm should ensure that:
A second step is to create an authorisation procedure within the opportunity to escalate the most controversial material to a different department, compliance, or a panel of senior managers.
Established the procedure is mandatory to embrace it into a proper policy that must be distributed to the marketing department, maintained updated and, contained process to receive complaint from customer.
Finally, the compliance department must maintain the record of all the material approved, mandatory for the financial information to complain within M.I.F.I.D. regulations.
The Financial conduct authority publishes every year's guidance and material to inform and update the corporate department in the UK and Europe.
Still, it remains fundamental to adhere to the COBS 4 principles “Communicating with clients, including financial promotions.” .
June 2020
by Daniele Lupi