Secrets & lies: The struggle to whistleblow

Author: Laura Miller
Professional Adviser | 09 Feb 2012 | 08:00

Categories: Better Business

Topics: FSA| IHT| Law Society| Financial Risk Management| FOS

do-not-cross

The FSA is big on whistleblowing, or so it claims. But these adviser testimonies suggest the regulator is rather letting the industry down, writes Laura Miller.

In November, Professional Adviser revealed how an IFA company director tried five years ago to stop wrongdoing in his industry and was shocked by the reaction he received from life companies and the FSA.

Testimonies volunteered by IFAs in the months that followed point to ongoing regulatory failings and a widespread culture of don’t ask, don’t tell....

Director of a Bedfordshire IFA (name withheld)

“I had been on at a client about IHT planning for years, to no avail. Sadly she contracted cancer and entered hospital, when I learnt she was taking out a trust. Despite serious concerns from myself and her accountant she signed the forms to transfer £750,000 to the Cayman Islands 11 days before she died.

Concerned, I attended a seminar by the lawyer who designed and sold the trust. Asked whose professional indemnity insurance covered it, he said: “That’s not relevant, we’re giving clients a ladder to climb out of a hole. If they choose to fall off that ladder that’s their problem.”

I had suspicions it was fraud. Fortunately myself and the executors stopped the transfer of most of my client’s assets. But about 20 such trusts were written, most above £1m. Given the potential loss to UK investors – and that the scheme was promoted by a national brokerage – I felt it was my duty to tell the FSA.

Before it even considered investigating it wanted a written complaint and the three full files I’d gathered. I felt the regulator wanted a one man band to do its job for it. In the end the FSA did nothing and I doubt I’d waste my time again in a 
similar situation.

The lawyer has been suspended from the Law Society and subsequently barred.

I despair that our regulators seem intent on making it virtually impossible for the honest IFA to work effectively while ignoring situations where there is a real possibility of significant losses to investors.”

Julian Pruggmayer, IFA owner of Financial Risk Management

“A client worked for a large employer with a good pension scheme, where the company paid in 6% if the employee paid 3%. An individual who did not reveal himself as unauthorised, advised her not to join it.

Using paperwork from an authorised friend of his at an IFA firm, rather than consolidating her four current pensions – which she had already paid charges on – , he set up yet another pension at more cost.

Page 1 of 2

More from professional adviser

Recommended reading

Categories

Topics

Comments

Disgraceful

If this is to be believed we should seriously consider witholding FSA fees until a full review has been undertaken. Surely this goes to the heart of the problem as I see it. There is no one at the FSA who has time for what they see as insignificant at the start and can fine or regulate with hindsight if they chose to. I met with Jon McGuire and it looked too good to be true so I didn't use Arch Cru. Sam with Zero's, Key Data yet i pay the same fees as a firm that has had clients claim for this type of thing. Excactly what are Sands and the FSA watching?? Oh of course RBS after the event!

Posted by: Mark Stokes

09 Feb 2012 | 12:32
Complain about this comment

whistle what?

I confronted my business partner with what I knew to be serious breaches of the FSAs "Principles for business" and gave the FSA a written and signed synopsis plus a full copy of one particular file that clearly illustrated both client disadvantage, fraud,deceit and total disregard of at least 7 of the listed principles. All supported by other advisors in the company willing to bear testimony. Absolutely no reaction or action by the FSA. They originally even lost the file. They hide behind the statement that they do not discuss their investigations. There was also a hint that they viewed it as a "commercial dispute"? How could client disadvantage and a breach of the majority of their principles ever be considered a "commercial dispute"? This person is still involved in mortgage business!! Disgusting......

Posted by: terry

10 Feb 2012 | 11:09
Complain about this comment

Related articles

Most Read

Audio / Visual

Coffee Lounge

View all the winners here

PPR Structured Product Awards 2011

View all the winners here

This year we have 14 awards designed to mark out the very best products in a highly competitive and innovative market. This includes three new awards for 2011 to reflect the developments in this rapidly growing market: Best Dual/Multi-Index Product, Best Structured (Oeic) Fund and Best Structured Product Provider.

Events

event logo

International Fund & Product Awards 2012

14 Jun 2012 - 14 Jun 2012

London, UK

event logo

British Mortgage Awards 2012

03 Jul 2012 - 03 Jul 2012

London, UK

event logo

Cover Webinars

04 Jul 2012 - 04 Jul 2012

London, UK

Poll

Should there be a cap on hourly fees?

Viewpoints