SVS Securities - shut down?

johnburman

But manorhouse does the UK actually give "better protection" than overseas?  We need this answering first.  Three questions:  is there a more rigorous policing of liquidity; client segregation of assets ; and finally compensation  [which is all likely to be the same as they come from the EU in theory; but in practice?  Remember Iceland in 2008?].

Lets answer these, and until we do UK only brokers I would suggest      

masonic

manorhouse said:

Its a wonder some of the new ones have not considered bringing themselves into that "better protection" if that is holding off market share .

I doubt it is holding off market share. I wouldn't have thought many people would be clued up about the protection schemes relating to investment firms. There are several reasons why a firm might decide to make use of the single EU rulebook for financial services, the most obvious ones being simplicity for the business and lower cost. Given that it is well known that the UK plans to diverge from common EU standards after the end of this year (though nobody knows which ones), such firms may find they are unable to continue offering services within the UK without signing up to direct UK authorisation. I'm sure if that happens they will take a view and either do so or withdraw from the UK market. Some firms that were formerly using the passport scheme have already made the switch, showing their commitment to keeping a presence in the UK.

manorhouse said:

And no one with knowledge of the Americans ones.
Its not clear what protection there is with the Americans did someone suggest covered for even more ?

"American ones" cannot lawfully operate within the UK without being UK authorised. I believe it was you who suggested investing with Interactive Brokers would afford you US protection, which is much more, but bowlhead disabused you of that notion in this post. Any US firm selling financial services within the UK will be subject to the UK regime and FSCS protection, unless they are operating through a European subsidiary, in which case you'd be subject to the rules and protections of that EU/EEA member state.

manorhouse said:

Did the FSCS treat non British and non EU customers of SVS any differently ?

SVS didn't really have much in the way of non-EU custom. It would let investors open an overseas account, but to do so they would need a UK bank account. Those people would have FSCS eligibility. However, if SVS was selling financial services directly into non-EU markets, those individuals probably wouldn't be eligible for FSCS protection and would likely be subject to whatever regime existed in the country in question.

masonic

johnburman said:

But manorhouse does the UK actually give "better protection" than overseas?  We need this answering first.  Three questions:  is there a more rigorous policing of liquidity; client segregation of assets ; and finally compensation  [which is all likely to be the same as they come from the EU in theory; but in practice?  Remember Iceland in 2008?].

Lets answer these, and until we do UK only brokers I would suggest      

I fully support you asking those questions in a venue where you are likely to receive a useful answer.

johnburman

And where would that be masonic?

englishmas

Any idea about advisory account , are these going to be treated like XO account?

masonic

johnburman said:

And where would that be masonic?

You could do a lot worse than start a new thread on this forum, give it a relevant title, and invite comment from the wider forum community.

masonic

englishmas said:

Any idea about advisory account , are these going to be treated like XO account?

Were those accounts not substantially the same as the XO accounts, just with SVS operating them on behalf of customers?

englishmas

Thanks masonic for your response, I hope that is the case, so that I can mange myself once the account transfer to ITI.
Any idea about LC cost we (FCSC) have to pay?

masonic

englishmas said:

Thanks masonic for your response, I hope that is the case, so that I can mange myself once the account transfer to ITI.
Any idea about LC cost we (FCSC) have to pay?

Costs totalled about £5m at the time of the last progress report if I remember correctly. I'd guestimate final costs will end up being somewhere in the region of £7.5m. Most of the work is now done. The basis for apportioning that cost between investors has also been discussed in the progress report. This is of little interest to XO clients provided they are covered, but for advisory clients, it could be a relevant figure as it will limit the amount that could be paid out in compensation for bad advice.

englishmas

Thanks again
Let's hope for my account the cost is not too high , as the FCA ombudsman already awarded me the compensation which on my calculation way above the 85k, So  I think my claim to FSCS will be 85k- cost= much less than the compensation awarded by the ombudsman.
LC in their current update did not say anything the timing for making my compensation claims to FSCS, any idea when and how I can do this. Very much appreciate your response.