SVS Securities - shut down?

Thrugelmir

manorhouse said:

Thrugelmir said:

manorhouse said:

masonic said:

helencary said:

Love the article on the Leonard Curtis website about their successfully completed and orderly transfer of clients accounts from SVS to ITI!!!!!!

In fairness, the transfer was orderly. It was everything that followed that was a catastrophe, for which ITI are solely responsible.

They chose ITI.

And the alternatives were?  I'd hazard a guess at not worth the bother. 

“An investor who has all the answers doesn’t even understand all the questions.” John Templeton

An investor should at least have a basic understanding on how the world of business operates. 

Halty2

I can't remember if I ticked the boxes but I definitely remember pressing the red button. I printed off the page showing my holdings and did that before closing, if I go into that account now I can't seen my holdings just a message saying "closure in progress". They say they will transfer the cash out immediately, no sign of that yet, they also ask for the name of the new broker, in my case I've asked Hargreaves Lansdown  to transfer my shares to them and have filled in the HL form to do that.

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED

Masonic said:
"LC's responsibilities are set out in law. They are required to prepare a distribution plan which deals with the return of client assets"
The return of client assets has not been dealt with.
"The Creditors' Committee represents all investors and creditors."
Statutory representation under duress, as is the case here, is a contempt of Article 20 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is therefore immoral and illegal.
"It is not reasonable to level blame at them for the failings of an FCA authorised firm that was approved by the FCA as suitable for accepting the transfer."
It is reasonable to do so.  LC are responsible for returning clients' assets.  They have not done so.  Instead it appears that they have attempted to extract value from client assets for the benefit of others by charging ITI for those assets. They should have chosen other reliable brokers without charge.
"Blaming LC for not knowing in advance ITI's handling of the IT was going to be a disaster is like blaming SVS investors for not knowing the company was unsound." 
No it isn't.  LC have statutory and moral responsibilities to return clients' assets,  Clients are responsible for no more than ensuring their broker is FCA regulated;  in fact they don't even have that responsibility; they are entitled to rely on the Government doing that anyway.
Whose side are you on  Masonic?

gibson81

Has anyone asked ITI if you need to open an Phoenix account to have your holdings transferred out? I have just logged in and my holdings are on their Qort platform. I do not have any intention of doing any buying or selling through ITI and really just want my shares transferred to another broker.

manorhouse

"Blaming LC for not knowing in advance ITI's handling of the IT was going to be a disaster is like blaming SVS investors for not knowing the company was unsound."
LC were paid to be professional most SVS investors were not professional.
Maybe most professional types in this country are grossly overpaid .
The gap does not match the reward.
 

gibson81

johnburman said:

For those interested, I am now "on-boarded" to our joint account, in my name only.
Weird.  Needless to say I can't trade on any of our accounts, despite being a client from 23 July.
I feel ITI are a lost cause.  The platform is too complex and their customer service is hopeless anyway.  So for those who agree we need to move and do it quickly.  I have now got accounts with other brokers and started the transfer process to them 8 days ago.  Now how long will it take to move I wonder?  Anyone completed the process yet?  

I have also requested transfer through two separate brokers. I understand the process can take up to 8 weeks. Clearly the August holiday period and the virus will not help... But at least there is light at the end of the tunnel. I will then close my ITI accounts.

BSS

Thank you Snipkin and Shiznit76 for your advice regarding cash withdrawal.
I am relieved to report I received my access details yesterday. After lengthy and very helpful conversations with LC, they contacted ITI on my behalf and it appears my service provider had blocked the email containing the details - they thought it was spam - maybe due to the Russian address!!! I was able to give ITI a Goggle email address and the details came through on that. However it was interesting that I did receive the general emails  ITI sent to reassure (??) us.
One thing of interest I discovered during my conversations with LC is they were left with very little choice but to transfer us to ITI. Of the 11(?) expressions of interest from other platforms all but two of them gradually dropped out. One of the remaining was considered not suitable. As Masonic said in a previous post, ITI were checked out by everyone including the FCA and all agreed ITI was able to handle the different types of SVS accounts.
By the way the FCA are very aware of the difficulties we are experiencing and they are investigating ITI's procedures - not that that is much help to us at present. I was told by LC that "the FCA will be keeping a very close eye on ITI"  - so maybe not a company to stay with if anyone is even remotely considering this.
I also want to add how grateful I am to LC. They have been extremely helpful in sorting out my problem.

My2penneth

Of the 3 , the top candidate for taking on SVS accounts dropped out..they were almost about to sign but pulled out..they decided to take on other work instead. Don't know who they were.
This left 2 candidates.  One of the candidates was an ex SVS director, the FCA said "no". This left just ITI from an initial 100+ interested parties.  

masonic

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED said:

Masonic said:
"LC's responsibilities are set out in law. They are required to prepare a distribution plan which deals with the return of client assets"
The return of client assets has not been dealt with.

The client assets are deemed returned when they have been transferred to the new broker. What you have now is a dispute with the new broker over the level of access you have to those assets. You can at any time reject your assets being transferred to ITI by contacting LC. If you should do this, they will be held in trust at ITI on behalf of LC, and at that point it again becomes LC's responsibility to return the assets to you by other means. I would not recommend that course of action though, as it could be even slower.

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED said:

"The Creditors' Committee represents all investors and creditors."
Statutory representation under duress, as is the case here, is a contempt of Article 20 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is therefore immoral and illegal.

I do not believe it is "illegal". That is a rather extraordinary claim, and if true paves the way to legal challenge. Have you taken any such steps?

The Creditors' Committee was constituted following a decision process. The vast majority of investors chose not to take part in this process, but just as those who do not vote in elections still get to be represented by their duly elected local MP, those who do not take part in the constitution of the Creditors' Committee still get to be represented by them. Any investor may contact the Creditors' Committee to discuss their concerns, and a suitable quorum of investors may call a meeting of creditors. Have you taken any such steps?

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED said:

"It is not reasonable to level blame at them for the failings of an FCA authorised firm that was approved by the FCA as suitable for accepting the transfer."
It is reasonable to do so.  LC are responsible for returning clients' assets.  They have not done so.  Instead it appears that they have attempted to extract value from client assets for the benefit of others by charging ITI for those assets. They should have chosen other reliable brokers without charge.

The distribution plan, including details of the nominated broker were shared and duly approved by the Creditors' Committee, the FCA and the High Court. The Creditors' Committee represents all investors and creditors. The distribution plan was executed correctly and on time by LC. It should be noted that the 3 week delay between publication and execution of the transfer is a legal requirement so that interested parties have an opportunity to lodge objections with LC or the court.

A list of appropriate brokers was probably provided to LC by the FCA, and we can take it that ITI's name was on that list. LC are a firm of insolvency practitioners. It is not reasonable to level blame at them for the failings of an FCA authorised firm that was approved by the FCA as suitable for accepting the transfer. Only the FCA has the power to go in and properly inspect/audit ITI.

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED said:

"Blaming LC for not knowing in advance ITI's handling of the IT was going to be a disaster is like blaming SVS investors for not knowing the company was unsound." 
No it isn't.  LC have statutory and moral responsibilities to return clients' assets,  Clients are responsible for no more than ensuring their broker is FCA regulated

They are required to prepare a distribution plan which deals with the return of client assets, and how expenses of the special administration may be allocated. It must be approved by the Creditors' committee, the FCA, and the court. The client assets are deemed returned when they have been transferred to the new broker.

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED said:

Whose side are you on  Masonic?

I'm not on anyone's side. I am a dispassionate and disinterested observer. I deal in facts, not hyperbole. I can see why that would aggravate an exasperated and exhausted individual such as yourself. The fact is LC have adequately discharged their responsibilities in law. I'm not disagreeing that what has followed isn't a disaster, and an avoidable one at that, but only two parties really could have known this was coming in advance, and neither of those parties is LC.

Of course, you are free to disagree with me, but I would suggest that you focus your energy on those who have a capacity to bring your suffering to an end.

masonic

gibson81 said:

Has anyone asked ITI if you need to open an Phoenix account to have your holdings transferred out? I have just logged in and my holdings are on their Qort platform. I do not have any intention of doing any buying or selling through ITI and really just want my shares transferred to another broker.

I haven't asked ITI, but information posted to this thread recently makes it pretty clear this is not necessary if you just want to transfer out.