SVS Securities - shut down?

My2penneth

Marianne Tamworth 5* review ( 4 previous reviews...all created this week ).
Mark Samuel's 5* review ( one review listed)
Joanne Page 5* ( 6 reviews , all in the last 2 weeks)
Trent Jones 5* ( 1 review)
Kevin Donaldson 5* ( 4 reviews, all 2 weeks ago)
Etc!
I've a good mind to set up some dummy accounts myself to counter these FAKE reviews.

Message to ITI...no amount of 5* fake reviews will help ...your card is marked with The Fools as well now! 

My2penneth

sweeter_strudel said:

shiznit76 said:

so i take it ITI will sell any AIM holdings we have as instructed  seeing as can't trade them on Phoenix? 

Don't do anything rash. I have lots of AIM shares and you can get quotes for all of them to sell / buy on Phoenix. Someone on here (actuallygo back a couple of pages)  bought shares on Phoenix and was then told by ITI that those shares couldn't be bought or sold on Phoenix - including some FTSE100 shares! 

Sadly I can't access my SVS / Phoenix accounts at the mo.... yes,  been locked out  for weeks.  So  can't do any house keeping. AIM shares can be transferred to your new broker - without selling them!

ITI have no idea what they are doing - start, middle, end of story. Don't believe anything that they say, including making out you are a millionaire by multiplying all your share holdings and getting their values all wrong.

Course they'll sell em for you...for a cost.  
I'm starting to also suspect that ITI have lost data as to our shareholdings...why else would they ask me what shares should be in my accounts....they should know !

The FTSE100 shares were Hargreaves Lansdowne (~8bn market cap) & Relx (~35bn market cap).  I also checked my iShares ( missing) could be traded on Phoenix.?.of course they can.

There is no excuse for not initiating transfer out to another broker...unless they lose the transfer paperwork for a third time ( GDPR issues !)

johnburman

I had thought that ITI were delaying transfers out of incompetence but i now wonder if it is because they have incorrect or inaccurate data on our shareholdings. Remember what went to them from LC was correct data... Our shareholdings were correct... But now could be corrupted or inaccurate. All a bit worrying. 

Michael_Reynolds

Jamesram said:

Strictly we should have had access to our accounts from 11 June- But a deal agreed was for ITI to have UP TO 6 weeks to implement their systems and they took full advantage.  Don't forget they had been in agreement to purchase since on or before 7 April:-  

CLIENT UPDATE – 7 APRIL 2020     [from LC Download of that date]
"Positive Progress on Transfer
The Joint Special Administrators (the "Administrators") are pleased to inform clients that they have entered into an agreement (the "Transfer Agreement") with a nominated broker in respect of the transfer of the vast majority of SVS's custody assets and client money to that broker.
The nominated broker is a London Stock Exchange member firm and is an FCA regulated entity with all appropriate permissions for the transfer and holding custody assets and client money for clients".

They should have been fully operational by 23 July - no excuses!

Looks like you've researched this very carefully and therefore perhaps I'm wrong about the end date? I'm puzzled however given that the official date for ITI to send out the logins was July 24th? I actually received mine by email Sat Jul 25th. If I recall none of us could sight the holdings in our onboarding accounts until we completed the identity verification process by uploading the required proof documents to ITI's website? Once I'd done that I was able to gain full visibility of my onboarding account. My physical unit holldings were Exactly as per my SVS account agreed with Carl Lever at LC. The valuations were also all correct with the exception of two ex PIBS which were overvalued by a factor of 100. PIBS are quoted on the LSE per GBP100. I immediately raised a notification regarding this over valuation with ITI. My cash accounts were also correct apart from the five missing ishare dividends paid June 24th which LC didn't retreive from Crest until August 12th. I think this clearly proves that ITI's claim in their recent message to SVS Clients of Sept 11th regarding fractional transfers of holdings from LC to be a blatant lie. Cash accounts clearly did move on different dates but NOT portfolio unit holdings. I also think that under the terms of the sale agreement that ITI have to facilitate AIM Holdings. Our rights to approve the sale were waived by LC and the High Court. We were given mo choice in the matter of the sale to ITI, something I still find very hard to fathom?. My understanding is that it was ALL or Nothing for ITI.  They had to take the complete SVS database in it's entirety that includes AIM Holdings and Non resident SVS Clients. ITI didn't do any of the required due diliigence prior to signing the sale agreement and are now desperating trying to find excuses for their professional incompetence. I think we must assume that LC would have given ITI ample opportunity to inspect the contents of the SVS Clients database and would therefore have known that many Clients had AIM Holdings and some were non resident. These are all questions that LC must answer. and will have to if this all blows up in thier faces.

ahouse185

It might have been easier for ITI if they had taken onboard the SVS system, rebranded it and transferred their own clients to that system rather than trying to transfer SVS clients to the ITI system. The SVS system was reasonably good.

API45

Logged in again tonight both accounts incorrect no dividends showing despite receiving an email from ITI saying my accounts had been updated. Just sent a email highlighting a formal complaint to ITI, but I shall not hold my breath. What are we to do?
 I need access to MY savings ....... 

RasputinB

API45 said:

What are we to do?

1. make a claim for missing dividends to SVS Securities PLC (in special administration)

2. demand that the FCA confirm that dividend income is fully protected under CASS rules. That means that they must confirm that our dividend income is segregated and is not being used by ITI Capital.

Those are my thoughts. Maybe others have better ideas?

snipkin

ahouse185 said:

It might have been easier for ITI if they had taken onboard the SVS system, rebranded it and transferred their own clients to that system rather than trying to transfer SVS clients to the ITI system. The SVS system was reasonably good.

Yes!! This is sort of what I suggested recently. Yours is a better idea than what I suggested - that LC allowed SVS to continue under strict supervision so we could make an 'orderly' exit over, say, a six month period whilst still able to trade as before on the SVS system. The SVS online system - as far as I experienced it over many years - worked, it was intuitive and fast. And you could even fund an account with debit card or withdraw cash in minutes directly into your bank account without faffing around with pdf downloads etc.

Another related point that has played on my mind - please bear with me, I know it is all 'water under the bridge' - troubled waters perhaps... About the selection of ITI Capital as the broker to take over our SVS accounts. I am sure I read somewhere some months ago (perhaps on this forum - not sure) that Leonard Curtis had over 100 brokers interested in taking over the SVS client book. Out of these, LC selected 11 brokers on a shortlist. Out of these 11, three were chosen for final detailed review. One of these three dropped out. So LC were left with two brokers - one of which was ITI (of course the names of the brokers were never disclosed at the time).This was around end of October 2019. There was then a long wait - way past the promised announcement date - before the choice of ITI was finally announced in February 2020. HOWEVER, I am sure I read somewhere that LC rejected the other broker of the two because one of the directors/managers (can't remember) was a previous SVS staff member. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Perhaps that other broker would have been the better choice?? I understand that LC are now employing ex SVS staff to help ITI sort their mess out!!

As someone said (on the new ShareSoc forum) so clearly and simply that I burst out laughing - if ITI was the best choice, what were the others like??

Oh well, another week - will anything be different at the end of this week? Will this situation go on indefinitely? Have I had one too many cups of coffee this morning? There should be a deadline imposed on ITI by LC/FCA/FSCS/FOS/LSE/Trading Standards/Consumer Association/CAB - perhaps our own @Jamesram - or whoever will finally and actually take action.

shiznit76

I struggle to understand how the "super" Phoenix system can trade all sorts of holdings, except AIM's. Did LC know this when ITI were appointed? Surely AIM trading is very common/popular for small traders, why would it be such a unique demand?

RasputinB

shiznit76 said:

why would it be such a unique demand?

Maybe it costs ITI more than £7.95 to execute a trade on AIM?