SVS Securities - shut down?

Emillion1

LC were made aware that transfer of clients was problematic.  They begged to differ, this was always going to happen!

shiznit76

has the Daily Mail been made aware of this farce?

Michael_Reynolds

My2penneth said:

Latest from Sharesoc
But we know the reality !!

I JUST CANNOT BELIEVE THAT MARK BENTLEY IS WRITING THIS FAKE NEWS?

Michael_Reynolds

johnburman said:

Time to talk "Compensation" with ITI?  Or is it too early?

NOT UNLESS YOU'VE ESCAPED FROM ITI. MY UNDERSTANDING FROM YOUR POSTS IS THAT YOU HAVEN'T? IS THAT CORRECT/

Michael_Reynolds

I sent the following email to Rahul Agarwal this morning:Believe me this is the only treatment that has any effect. You must copy everyone. The useless LC, Oleg the chess grand master, the sleeping FCA, the slow and understaffed FOS, LSE compliance. the hopelessly incompetant David Moss etc etc.

Mr Agarwal,

Last week I had to threaten your company with a fraud complaint to the police in order to get my dividends from Sept 29th & 30th updated to my cash accounts. I'm please to say you complied last Fri.

Today I logged into my account to find that in the last 48 hours you have credited a dividend of USD 112.19 to my Quort USD cash account WHICH ISN'T MINE!

There are hundreds of furious ex SVS Clients out there who have been waiting weeks for your company to update their dividends, meanwhile you are giving me their money!

 Is there no level of incompetence to which your company won't stoop?

FOR GOD SAKE GET YOURSELVES SORTED OUT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

I honestly don't know how you have the cheek to say in your email to me on Sat "We did have some technology issues initially, however we have always done right by our customers" 

Your company contracted to give 18,000 clients access to their securities and cash accounts with effect from July 23rd. Almost three months on and ITI remain in breach of contract. 

This is a quite intolerable situation.

Please provide a progress update on my Security & Asset transfer to Swissquote by return so I don't have to keep writing you these emails of complaint. 

I and 17,999 others want to get on with our lives!.

Thank you.

Michael Reynolds

Michael_Reynolds

Remember everyone that in a week's time it will be three months since the contracted date of July 23rd specified in the distribution plan. I have no  doubt whatsoever that ITI will try to charge fees from Oct 23rd even though they haven't actually done any work and our ssets remain in limbo! This must be met by a consolidated barrage of complaint emails copied to all. As far as I'm aware ITI haven't put out any communicatin to say that the free period will be extended?.

Josl

Michael_Reynolds said:

Remember everyone that in a week's time it will be three months since the contracted date of July 23rd specified in the distribution plan. I have no  doubt whatsoever that ITI will try to charge fees from Oct 23rd even though they haven't actually done any work and our ssets remain in limbo! This must be met by a consolidated barrage of complaint emails copied to all. As far as I'm aware ITI haven't put out any communicatin to say that the free period will be extended?.

Any custody fee ITI charge can be reversed since they failed to transfer out in the first 3 months. In my case, I never opened an account and started transfer on 4th-Aug. They failed two settlement dates after agreeing with my broker. I have in writing from my broker that ITI were non-responsive. I can forward this to FOS or go to small claims court if that doesn't work.

supersaverg

rnf11 said:

supersaverg said:

I'm pleased to report that I have finally had confirmation from Hargreaves...they've had the transfer of all my shared & cash, from ITI Capital.

Good for you. A straw for the rest of us to clutch at....

For clarification -  does that mean that you have no dividends still "in the pipeline" via ITIC?

Correct. I'm well and truly clear of ITI.
I'll stick to HL from now on. Their professionalism & mobile app are worth the slightly higher trade price. Personally, I like others, have certainly learned an expensive lesson here.  Not being able to trade my shares for over a year has hurt. 

My2penneth

Josl said:

Michael_Reynolds said:

Remember everyone that in a week's time it will be three months since the contracted date of July 23rd specified in the distribution plan. I have no  doubt whatsoever that ITI will try to charge fees from Oct 23rd even though they haven't actually done any work and our ssets remain in limbo! This must be met by a consolidated barrage of complaint emails copied to all. As far as I'm aware ITI haven't put out any communicatin to say that the free period will be extended?.

Any custody fee ITI charge can be reversed since they failed to transfer out in the first 3 months. In my case, I never opened an account and started transfer on 4th-Aug. They failed two settlement dates after agreeing with my broker. I have in writing from my broker that ITI were non-responsive. I can forward this to FOS or go to small claims court if that doesn't work.

I have an email from Agarwal stating that as I have expressed a wish to transfer out of ITI Capital I will not be charged a custody fee. I would use this as a precedent. Of course, I fully expect ITI capital to invoke a charge on my holdings but then that will be another complaint to the FOS. The only thing that ITI recognise will be fines..the rest is just BS. 

Jamesram

supersaverg said:

rnf11 said:

supersaverg said:

I'm pleased to report that I have finally had confirmation from Hargreaves...they've had the transfer of all my shared & cash, from ITI Capital.

Good for you. A straw for the rest of us to clutch at....

For clarification -  does that mean that you have no dividends still "in the pipeline" via ITIC?

Correct. I'm well and truly clear of ITI.
I'll stick to HL from now on. Their professionalism & mobile app are worth the slightly higher trade price. Personally, I like others, have certainly learned an expensive lesson here.  Not being able to trade my shares for over a year has hurt. 

Good luck supersaverg. Just to clarify  ITI's standard Rate Card charges

The online  Share Trade charge for LSE  is £12.50 (HL £11.95 max)

Custody Fee Flat fee Month end snapshot on asset value 25bps (.25%)pa (HL NIL on Trading account)

ISA management fee Percentage on account value Charged quarterly 30bps(.3%) pa, minimum £7.5 per quarter-  this means as I read it that an ISA will be charged at a total of .55% combined custody and management fees (reduced on custody element if there is Cash, but not on the ISA management fee element - as ever, ITI is unclear and confusing.

HL on the other hand charge a max of .45% for ISA management.

So it would appear that ITI's charges are in fact higher in all respects than what is perceived to be the most expensive, and they would say the best in terms of service provision amongst mainstream providers, HL.

As regards imposing those charges, I have noted before that the Consumer Rights Act 2015 acknowledges the right to a defence against payment of charges where the service provided is poor or non-existent, as is the case with ITI. A small claim online would cost £25 for a claim up to £300. The £25 would be recoverable as part of the claim. I will revisit the issue if and when charges start being applied to accounts awaiting delayed transfer out. LC have in the past confirmed to me in writing that charges in that situation would be unfair and said they would raise it with ITI when they were meeting regularly- no subsequent feedback of course.

Lastly, just a further point on legal matters:- the FCA Handbook, CASS Schedule 5 recognises that contravention of CASS Rules by ITI , (ie Rules to provide good administration, record keeping, etc etc as referred to in past posts) can be actionable under Section 138D of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Actions for damages) by a  person who suffers loss as a result of the contravention. -"S138D (2)A contravention by an authorised person of a rule made by the FCA is actionable at the suit of a private person who suffers loss as a result of the contravention, subject to the defences and other incidents applying to actions for breach of statutory duty."

Why this is significant, in my view, is that it is made  crystal clear (in as much as the Law ever makes things crystal clear) that a breach of the FCA CASS Rules ( and it must be a Rule, not Guidance -Sched 5) of itself gives rise to a claim in damages for breach of the statutory duty imposed by the FCA. This is something that can therefore be pointed out fair and square to ITI, the FOS, and anyone else who just might give a damn. Of course, the damages have to relate to a "loss", as has also  been discussed here before. But at least as regards liability it provides some simplicity:  "ITI has broken Rules set out in CASS 6 and 7 - I therefore have a clear statutory right to sue ITI for damages in respective of my losses caused by the  breach of those Rules."