SVS Securities - shut down?

Jamesram

shawdon said:

A bit more pressure being applied by ShareSoC today:
 Mark Bentley wrote:

 I have not had a meaningful response to my email to ITI, other than an acknowledgement, promise to revert with a proper response and a request not to copy the FCA in! I shall ignore the latter request - glad I've touched a nerve.

 I have send a chasing email today, saying:

 I am disappointed not to have heard anything further from you about this matter. The SVS clients continue to be very frustrated and annoyed about the lack of communication from ITI.

 In the absence of a reasonably prompt response to their concerns, ShareSoc will have to consider what further action can be taken to obtain a satisfactory resolution.

 In the absence of a response early next week, my step will be to contact the FCA directly to get their suggestions on how this can be resolved. In the absence of a satisfactory response from them, the next step will be to pursue parliamentary and press channels to increase the pressure on the FCA to act.

Thanks Mark Bentley and thanks Shawdon - last para = way to go!

rnf11

 Mark Bentley wrote:

 I have not had a meaningful response to my email to ITI, other than an acknowledgement, promise to revert with a proper response and a request not to copy the FCA in! I shall ignore the latter request - glad I've touched a nerve.

Hmm. Have, by any chance, the FCA already begun to hassle ITIC?

rnf11

This appeared in the online version of CITY AM this morning:-

Friday 18 September 2020 6:00 am      The lacklustre FCA is in desperate need of regulatory oversight.

                    The FCA has a legacy of incompetence, argues Philip Sinel

It is unlikely that Juvenal, the first century Roman poet, had the Financial Conduct Authority in mind when he famously asked: “Who guards the guards?”
A slew of depressingly similar scandals have, however, brought the question of regulatory oversight into sharp relief. Indeed, such has been the extent of the FCA’s negligence and downright incompetence that it seems the regulator has, in secret, launched a campaign to get itself abolished.
After all, within the space of a week in August, the FCA was strongly criticised by Dame Elizabeth Gloster for failing to make any headway in the investigation into the causes of the London Capital & Finance scandal before latterly announcing that it intends to cap the compensation it pays out even when its actions are identified as “the chief cause of loss”. It would seem that the guards are refusing to let themselves be guarded.

Incidents such as these are far from being isolated. The Tomlinson Report in 2013, for instance, found that even whilst RBS was clearly and “systematically abusing customers,” the FCA did nothing. No action was brought after HBOS committed its jaw-dropping frauds.

Lacklustre regulation
But perhaps the clearest example is the PPI scandal. Flagrant misselling was an open secret: stories of banks jacking up the interest on loans sold without PPI abounded. The then FSA knew full well what was taking place right under its nose and did nothing, beyond issuing a lacklustre report in 2005 noting poor selling practices and lack of compliance controls.
Of course, the mis-selling continued and the first fine was not issued until 2007, and even then these only targeted smaller institutions such as Alliance & Leicester, which lost a desultory £7m in fines from an estimated PPI income of £135m.
Eventually, a further two years later, PPI was banned, but not before individuals lost huge sums in one of the worst banking scandals in living memory. But it was not swift, clear-sighted action from the regulator that did it for PPI. Rather, the rise of claims companies that spurred individuals to seek out redress in such huge numbers that the regulator had to act.

The FSA has since evolved into the FCA, but it is clear that incompetence runs in the family. In fact, if *Antony Townsend, the UK Complaints Commissioner, is to be believed, the FCA’s failure to take action for six months after news of investors being defrauded came to light is a sure sign that it has a ‘lack of curiosity or sense of urgency’. In other jurisdictions such words might be terminal, but not here.

FCA does not live up to the City

Our present state of affairs should be a cause of alarm. The City – the alleged envy of the world – is barely regulated and all too often allowed to run riot. This is not because we lack the resources or the ability to properly police the sector, but because the regulator all too often works hand-in-glove with banks and political interests.
Thus, it is a predictable absurdity that the government’s Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan scheme advisor is a Conservative Party donor. Ours is a revolving door system, where a procession of Treasury permanent secretaries – Lord Burns, Sir Peter Middleton and Lord Macpherson, to name a few – stroll out of Whitehall and into plum City jobs.
Such a situation does not lead to effective regulation and swift action against wrong doing. The City may be a modern wonder of the world, but its regulator appears to have been drawn from a banana republic.

It is long overdue that we sought to guard the guards. When the regulator fails, as it so often does, the government must step in: individuals who preside over myriad instances of regulatory incompetence must not become the governor of the central bank, for instance.
   
We need a regulator that is transparent and accountable, where compensation is not capped simply because it is easier than regulating, and where individuals are empowered to secure redress not just from banks, but also from the regulators themselves. It is not that such steps cannot be taken, but that powerful interest groups prevail to step these being taken.

Or perhaps the FCA is indeed trying to get itself abolished.

Philip Sinel is a senior partner at Sinels

City A.M.'s opinion pages are a place for thought-provoking views and debate. These views are not necessarily shared by City A.M.

Share: duly done!

* Is Antony Townsend, the UK Complaints Commissioner someone else whose doors we could usefully darken icw all the LC/ICIT/FCA shortcomings?

My2penneth

How many pages of complaints have we got now...well over 200!

My2penneth

Update on my wife's accounts received from ii today.

My2penneth

The first hint of problems started at page 154.
Pafpcg reported
"And so the schedule for getting access begins to slide!"

Here we are at Page 406!

johnburman

Some Shout Outs:
1   Geeba - you have a Trade and more importantly a SETTLEMENT DATE.  You are my hero. 

Now we all know such a thing exists we can all ask our new brokers "When is my settlement date...what do mean you have not yet got one.  Why ever not?"; and
2  Shawdon.  What I thought was interesting about the letter was the below:
"I have not had a meaningful response to my email to ITI, other than an acknowledgement, promise to revert with a proper response and a request not to copy the FCA in!"

Why ever not?  That request from ITI must of itself be a breach of the FCA rules - how is it being open, fairt and fran with the Regulator?
PLUS why did ITI not want the letter copied?  Do they actually fear/are worried about the FCA?  Even more reason for each of us to tell the FCA of all the continuing defaults of ITI.

n_aftab

johnburman said:

Some Shout Outs:
1   Geeba - you have a Trade and more importantly a SETTLEMENT DATE.  You are my hero. 

Now we all know such a thing exists we can all ask our new brokers "When is my settlement date...what do mean you have not yet got one.  Why ever not?"; and
2  Shawdon.  What I thought was interesting about the letter was the below:
"I have not had a meaningful response to my email to ITI, other than an acknowledgement, promise to revert with a proper response and a request not to copy the FCA in!"

Why ever not?  That request from ITI must of itself be a breach of the FCA rules - how is it being open, fairt and fran with the Regulator?
PLUS why did ITI not want the letter copied?  Do they actually fear/are worried about the FCA?  Even more reason for each of us to tell the FCA of all the continuing defaults of ITI.

The only reason i can think of it they don't want the FCA to get a true picture of the extent of the problem .. lets be honest ..  FCA have been fast asleep during all of this. 

johnburman

Agreed and we all need to wake them up

shawdon

Some more feedback just given to Mark Bentley (ShareSoc) who is conversing with ITI who are trying to make excuses for their very poor service:
Mark,
I have finally managed to get some communication from Chris Smith (head of London Operation) and Rahul Agarwal (Head of Private Clients) with some apologies and some of the missing dividend information. They also promise that my 8 account transfers to HL are being processed and this is now confirmed by HL although when this will happen is unclear. Worryingly they have transposed one of my son’s ISA and non-ISA accounts so they are incorrect and getting them to acknowledge this is very difficult. The MSE forum is now up to 406 pages with more than 200 pages of complaints about ITI so they need to walk the talk and actually get their act together. So far not one ex-SVS customer has managed to escape from ITI with their shares and there is a growing feeling that this business is so corrupt and inefficient it is only a matter of time before it fails as they cannot make any money with such an awful reputation on Google and Trustpilot.
Hope this feedback helps.
xxxxxxx