SVS Securities - shut down?

Emillion1

Sheris said:

Emillion1 said:

Michael_Reynolds said:

Emillion1 said:. 

Incorrect.
The FX business was in the main run via China, most clients were classified as Elective Professional Clients when possibly not qualifying, the client classification rules are quite specific. The FX - clients were screwed over on the B book (run out of Dubai by some Directors of SVS) The FX business has not been sold, who wants 5,000+ small account size Chinese punters who have lost their money!  
The XO business of SVS has never made any money and was a lead generator for the advisory business.  My assumption is ITI will have seen this as a low client acquisition cost and try and cross sell to get a ROI.  Get ready for the phone calls from them!

The FX business was far more profitable than the XO business. XO never made a profit. Regarding FX - The house always wins!

Are we now being asked to believe that ITI were stupid enough to pay GBP 500,000 for the non profitable SVS XO clients and got NOTHING else? Wake up and read the linked article I posted and jamesram detailed in full. The story is all there in black and white!

They are not stupid, if they can cross sell clients to leveraged products, they will get that 500K back very, very quickly. The FX business of SVS is still for sale, it is in the latest LC report - In black and white!

Where can the L&C report been found Please ?

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04402606/filing-history

manorhouse

Can someone please remind me when ITI will start using there own charges.
They are quite useless .
Has anyone been charged the £5 fx min charge for transfers of usa dividends to sterling .
The site is way to complicated you can not see simple things easily that the game i fear .

Emillion1

Sheris said:

Emillion1 said:

Whilst it is dreadful and down to total incompetence that XO clients have not had their shares transferred, the real sad part is the people who have had their Defined Benefit pensions decimated.  The bonds which have been sold had connected parties, as per the FCA notice.  WHY would an IFA recommend a client to exit a DB scheme, transfer into a SIPP and then give discretion to a manager without a history of managing clients investments or track record.   WHY? Backhanders all the way through the introduction chain. There should be an FCA and police fraud enquiry into SVS and the IFA's.  Conspiracy to defraud springs to mind.

The Police should have been envolved a long time ago and still not to late in the future.

The interesting thing will be Leonard Curtis' investigation into the conduct of the Directors, sadly a private document and not for public consumption.  FCA firms are required to provide GABRIEL returns to FCA on a regular basis, SVS as a €730K firm more-so, approx every 20 working days.  Amongst others, SVS owed HMRC £770,000  predominantly PAYE (my guess 5 months PAYE) the company must have been trading insolvent for some time.  PUTTING CLIENTS AT RISK.  It would be interesting to cross reference the submitted GABRIEL returns with the true financial position. It is a criminal offence to submit a false GABRIEL return.  The creditor position being (£5.884m) when LC were appointed.  There is a lot more to this story yet! 

manorhouse

I have just managed to log in to phoenix webtader but can not see how you might be able to place a deal .
I can see money totals ( Cash ) but can not see anyway to see any details. 
Can anyone else see any transactions ?
What a nuisance putting us in the hands of this shower.

sweetsand

IMHO, a delay of a few days to a week could have been digested by many but over three months. It makers a farce look clever.

My2penneth

manorhouse said:

I have just managed to log in to phoenix webtader but can not see how you might be able to place a deal .
I can see money totals ( Cash ) but can not see anyway to see any details. 
Can anyone else see any transactions ?
What a nuisance putting us in the hands of this shower.

In Phoenix there is a square button marked Trade.


If you click it, it will bring up this window...order ticket.

I typed in DGE as an example.  

( seems easy so far....but hidden , just visible,  are the words ' order type"  above the "Submit Order"...I really haven't worked this out fully but all I can say is that it is not easy nor intuitive.)



With the likes of SVS, iWeb, Interactive Investor one would enter what one is looking to buy and the quantity.  The trading platform would offer a price and offer an opportunity to buy with a 15 second window. 
Oh , if only Phoenix was that simple..Maybe someone else can step in at this point and explain the next step!?

RasputinB

My2penneth said:

Maybe someone else can step in at this point and explain the next step!?

I have an account with Interactive Broker which uses the same web platform (but they have others available which are better).

In all my trades (US stocks) through this type of platform I have only ever placed limit orders. I'd expect that to be easy enough with Phoenix. With Interactive Broker if you click to deal you will get a warning that you don't have a live price and for a few cents you can get one. But I assume there would be no guarantee that you'd deal at that price - unless you place a limit order which might not be matched. My guess is that if you are regularly trading then this type of platform is rubbish. Others have mentioned "order aggregation" etc. and this suggests to me that we should all do some research and find out how to ensure that our trades go through at the best price. But if you just want to sell shares within the quote size then I'd get a live price from another feed and put the order in as a limit at that price or slightly below.

johnburman

I have received an email from Jarvis x-o saying that they have had mass delay with transfers from ITI and HERE IS THE INTERESTING BIT they have informed the FCA.

There is no progress with our transfers which are now 9 weeks old. 

One wonders what the FCA is doing about this.... !!!!!! all for all I can see. BUT we should keep the FCA informed as to our position and keep the complaints to them coming. 

eskbanker

johnburman said:

I have received an email from Jarvis x-o saying that they have had mass delay with transfers from ITI and HERE IS THE INTERESTING BIT they have informed the FCA.

There is no progress with our transfers which are now 9 weeks old. 

One wonders what the FCA is doing about this.... !!!!!! all for all I can see. BUT we should keep the FCA informed as to our position and keep the complaints to them coming. 

Many ISA transfers between numerous permutations of providers have been conducted well outside guideline timescales this year, given the Covid crisis that has naturally impacted on resourcing and efficiency levels throughout the financial services industry (and all others).  Not saying that the delays with transfers from ITI can be solely attributed to such issues but just highlighting that they're far from alone in not operating at the desired level, i.e. don't expect that FCA to leap into action for this particular company when they're not really out of step with what many others have been doing without apparent sanction.  That doesn't mean that two wrongs make a right of course!

pafpcg

Emillion1 said:
......
They are not stupid, if they can cross sell clients to leveraged products, they will get that 500K back very, very quickly. The FX business of SVS is still for sale, it is in the latest LC report - In black and white!

Sheris said:
Where can the L&C report been found Please ?

Emillion1 said:

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04402606/filing-history

That's the same report (Joint Special Administrators' Second Progress Report) which was published on the LC web-site on 26-August!  The "original" report is easier to read than the one at Companies House which has been scanned from a hard-copy version.

I'm curious where in the Administrators' Progress Report it states or implies that the FX business of SVS is still for sale.  Could you give us a page and paragraph number?  Many thanks.