SVS Securities - shut down?

My2penneth

Yes, sorry. I've deleted the post to avoid confusion. 

shawdon

Still no progress with ITI. No reply to my questions about my missing Vod dividends, my cash figure on my dashboard is still incorrectly showing about £20k even though i have actually withdrawn it in full, my portfolio value is showing about £4k when the real figure is about £100k and of course still no access to Phoenix so i am unable to trade shares. This appalling state of affairs is replicated across all 5 accounts that i manage so one month after we were supposed to get access to our funds we are still in a state of suspended animation!

Sheris

rnf11 said:

Dividends. More fuel to the fire...

Message from LC yesterday re "missing" VOD divi; LC stated it was received on the 7th and subsequently passed on to ITIC (and also stating an awareness of ITIC's "problems").

So it should be there - somewhere.

Looking forward - if and when the a/c transfers out do actually happen, I foresee a tedious long haul chasing up "missing" dividends during and just after that process.

L&C should pay back our costs, have been given very good advice on my Pets at Home and waiting with self - restraint.   

masonic

Sheris said:

rnf11 said:

Dividends. More fuel to the fire...

Message from LC yesterday re "missing" VOD divi; LC stated it was received on the 7th and subsequently passed on to ITIC (and also stating an awareness of ITIC's "problems").

So it should be there - somewhere.

Looking forward - if and when the a/c transfers out do actually happen, I foresee a tedious long haul chasing up "missing" dividends during and just after that process.

L&C should pay back our costs, have been given very good advice on my Pets at Home and waiting with self - restraint. 

You keep saying that, but thanks to the FSCS you haven't incurred any costs, and LC are immune under insolvency law from such a claim. Nothing would make me happier than for the FSCS to be refunded, as ultimately that money is coming out of the pockets of people like me, but first you will need to get the law changed. The only problem is, next time a broker goes bust, no insolvency firm will touch the case with a bargepole, so investors will never be reunited with their assets, as opposed to the situation we have now where they have to wait a long time but eventually do get them back.

Sheris

rnf11 said:

My2penneth said:
(i) the dividends belong to their clients - failure to ringfence dividends means FCA get involved.
(ii) If dividends are missing - how do clients make declarations to HMRC (and you really don't want HMRC on your case!)
(iii) ensuring publicity in the papers would not be good for business.

(I actually think that the dividend collection and distribution aspects are something that ITI might not currently have in place and they are working with their software providers to resolve the issue .....we shall see).

Can't help but wonder whether HMRC might be keeping an eye on ITIC for their own reasons already...

Surely if ITIC was previously offering clients a stocks and shares dealing facility then there would already have been a dividends distribution programme in place.

Looking more and more as though ITIC have misrepresented their abilities to all concerned.

HMRC should be looking at the FOC and L&C for transparent accountable business   

Sheris

masonic said:

Sheris said:

rnf11 said:

Dividends. More fuel to the fire...

Message from LC yesterday re "missing" VOD divi; LC stated it was received on the 7th and subsequently passed on to ITIC (and also stating an awareness of ITIC's "problems").

So it should be there - somewhere.

Looking forward - if and when the a/c transfers out do actually happen, I foresee a tedious long haul chasing up "missing" dividends during and just after that process.

L&C should pay back our costs, have been given very good advice on my Pets at Home and waiting with self - restraint. 

You keep saying that, but thanks to the FSCS you haven't incurred any costs, and LC are immune under insolvency law from such a claim. Nothing would make me happier than for the FSCS to be refunded, as ultimately that money is coming out of the pockets of people like me, but first you will need to get the law changed. The only problem is, next time a broker goes bust, no insolvency firm will touch the case with a bargepole, so investors will never be reunited with their assets, as opposed to the situation we have now where they have to wait a long time but eventually do get them back.

Rubbish in your statement, I would have paid for my own cost and claimed back from the FSCS, half the cost with good management, plus should have been solved in a max of 9 months. L&C hourly rate is a joke for a poor service, take the blinkers off and look at the situation, that many are still suffering and no end in sight.
 L&C are not immune under insolvency law, as you do not no the full facts.     

masonic

Sheris said:

masonic said:

Sheris said:

rnf11 said:

Dividends. More fuel to the fire...

Message from LC yesterday re "missing" VOD divi; LC stated it was received on the 7th and subsequently passed on to ITIC (and also stating an awareness of ITIC's "problems").

So it should be there - somewhere.

Looking forward - if and when the a/c transfers out do actually happen, I foresee a tedious long haul chasing up "missing" dividends during and just after that process.

L&C should pay back our costs, have been given very good advice on my Pets at Home and waiting with self - restraint. 

You keep saying that, but thanks to the FSCS you haven't incurred any costs, and LC are immune under insolvency law from such a claim. Nothing would make me happier than for the FSCS to be refunded, as ultimately that money is coming out of the pockets of people like me, but first you will need to get the law changed. The only problem is, next time a broker goes bust, no insolvency firm will touch the case with a bargepole, so investors will never be reunited with their assets, as opposed to the situation we have now where they have to wait a long time but eventually do get them back.

Rubbish in your statement, I would have paid for my own cost and claimed back from the FSCS

Either you paid or you didn't. If you "claimed back from the FSCS" then you didn't pay. Any money refunded belongs to the FSCS, not you. You will have entered into a legal agreement to that effect.

Sheris said:

L&C hourly rate is a joke for a poor service, take the blinkers off and look at the situation, that many are still suffering and no end in sight.

I don't disagree that insolvency work is overpriced and that the legal process is painfully slow.

I feel sorry for you, I really do, but you need to try and calm down and think about the situation rationally. Accusing people who are trying to help you understand the situation of posting rubbish and being blinkered is not going to help you. Neither is directing your rage towards LC, who have done what is required of them by law, charged what was agreed by the Creditors' Committee and the court, and moved you to an FCA approved broker according to a plan that was agreed by the Creditors' Committee, court and FCA. Their involvement and influence is drawing to a close, while those who are responsible for the current situation and those who could influence it don't seem to be attracting your attention at all.

ITI is responsible for providing their service offering with reasonable skill and care. They must treat their customers fairly and in line with the terms they have agreed with you. If they do not then they are liable. The FOS is there to impartially adjudicate complaints brought against financial firms if they cannot be resolved within a reasonable time. The FCA is responsible for protecting consumers and keeping the industry stable. These are the organisations that can sort out this mess.

Sheris said:

 L&C are not immune under insolvency law, as you do not no the full facts.     

Schedule B1, paragraph 43(6) of the Insolvency Act 1986 states:

"No legal process (including legal proceedings, execution, distress and diligence) may be instituted or continued against the company or property of the company except—
(a)with the consent of the administrator, or
(b)with the permission of the court."

Paragraph 69 states:

"In exercising his functions under this Schedule the administrator of a company acts as its agent."

Of course if LC had committed fraud or another unlawful act, then they could be prosecuted for that. But there is no evidence said fraud or other unlawful act has been committed, and you would not have posted what you posted in this thread if you had taken legal advice regarding such prosecution.

Michael_Reynolds

Thanks for your post SHAWDON. I'm in an identical situation.
Most of my dividends for the last twelve months are correct at ITI but for some reason five dividends paid on 24 Jun 2020 by LC to ITIC are missing from my ITI cash accounts.
My share portfolio is correct  but the valuation is hopelessly messed up. One day massively overvalued and the next woefully undervalued!
My Phoenix account request has been stuck since Aug 10th withg the following message
"It seems your document numbers or your issuing country are not updated with us, you may contact ITI customer support team.Alternatively,you may raise a request from Support Center (the first icon from top right corner)"

I've sent literally dozens of emails to ITI since Jul 27th & had virtually no response. All emails have been copied to LC but all I get is platitude replies from their partners indicating they are in touch with ITI.

I'm wondering how long this can continue before the FCA step in. Compensation should be paid for the stress caused by this charade.

EXASPERATEDEXHAUSTED

masonic said:
"No legal process (including legal proceedings, execution, distress and diligence) may be instituted or continued against the company or property of the company except—
(a)with the consent of the administrator, or
(b)with the permission of the court."
This is a vacuous point you have made.  The administrators are agents of the court, and any of their decisions or actions are subject to appeal just as any court decision is subject to appeal and the appeal must be allowed by the court if the decision or action is wrong.  In other words the court is legally obliged to give permission if the decision or action of the administrator is wrong.

masonic

Michael_Reynolds said:

I've sent literally dozens of emails to ITI since Jul 27th & had virtually no response. All emails have been copied to LC but all I get is platitude replies from their partners indicating they are in touch with ITI.

I'm wondering how long this can continue before the FCA step in. Compensation should be paid for the stress caused by this charade.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil. So the more of you who raise this with the FCA, the more likely they are to step in. I don't think anyone need worry about whether compensation will be paid. These are generally not minor issues people are grappling with. The formal complaints process, backed up with use of the FOS if necessary, is almost certain to succeed. Keep detailed records as you'll find them very useful.