SVS Securities - shut down?

LEAR1

RasputinB said:

LEAR1 said:

..I'm being asked to sign an overseas declaration relating to the application for an investment product (regulated product from an authorised firm) to say I understand I won't be afforded any UK regulatory protection..

Is the investment product a UK product from a UK branch of a UK authorised firm?

If it is then you need to clarify the "overseas declaration".

Are they saying that you won't be afforded any UK regulatory protection because of the status of the product or is it because of your residency status? Many investments aren't available to non UK residents but perhaps with this one they are saying that they will make it available to you provided that you sign the "overseas declaration".

You could decide to go ahead having signed the "overseas declaration" but that would surely mean extra risk? If you haven't already done so it is easy enough to go to the FCA website and check that you are dealing with a UK branch of a UK authorised firm.

If so you could phone the FCA (a freephone number so you can use Skype etc. from abroad) and ask them if it is acceptable for you to be asked to sign an "overseas declaration" for a UK product.

Hi Rasputin,

Thanks for the additional thoughts.

The product in question is the Blue Whale Growth Fund which is operated by Link Fund Solutions Limited (as Authorised Corporate Director). Link are asking for this declaration.

I think I have got there now. Their compliance team are accepting a caveat to the specific declaration point - that it is intended as a warning, and not a a waiver of any rights or protections that we might be entitled too (i.e FSCS compensation) - which I think is fine.

RasputinB

LEAR1 said:

RasputinB said:

LEAR1 said:

..I'm being asked to sign an overseas declaration relating to the application for an investment product (regulated product from an authorised firm) to say I understand I won't be afforded any UK regulatory protection..

Is the investment product a UK product from a UK branch of a UK authorised firm?

If it is then you need to clarify the "overseas declaration".

Are they saying that you won't be afforded any UK regulatory protection because of the status of the product or is it because of your residency status? Many investments aren't available to non UK residents but perhaps with this one they are saying that they will make it available to you provided that you sign the "overseas declaration".

You could decide to go ahead having signed the "overseas declaration" but that would surely mean extra risk? If you haven't already done so it is easy enough to go to the FCA website and check that you are dealing with a UK branch of a UK authorised firm.

If so you could phone the FCA (a freephone number so you can use Skype etc. from abroad) and ask them if it is acceptable for you to be asked to sign an "overseas declaration" for a UK product.

Hi Rasputin,

Thanks for the additional thoughts.

The product in question is the Blue Whale Growth Fund which is operated by Link Fund Solutions Limited (as Authorised Corporate Director). Link are asking for this declaration.

I think I have got there now. Their compliance team are accepting a caveat to the specific declaration point - that it is intended as a warning, and not a a waiver of any rights or protections that we might be entitled too (i.e FSCS compensation) - which I think is fine.

Personally I'd want to double check that the "Overseas Declaration" won't mean that the product you are actually investing in will no longer be a UK product; as defined by the FCA and FSCS.

Ravima

At the court hearing last Friday, it was confirmed that costs to date of the liquidation are £26.8m and the estimated future costs are £2.4m.

  

manted

Ravima said:

At the court hearing last Friday, it was confirmed that costs to date of the liquidation are £26.8m and the estimated future costs are £2.4m.  

@Ravima - any other useful points that you came across in the court hearing ? Did anyone raise any objections to the court

Ravima

It was more a formal hearing to agree a date where no more claims can come in. I was surprised that only 13 people attended, including the LC people, the Barrister, the Court clerk, the FSO and the judge. As far as I can remember, there were perhaps 5 clients. Given that there were 18K clients on the book, I was shocked at the apparent lack of interest from clients. 
To be fair to the Barrister, he was aware of the specific issues affecting the clients who attended and mentioned each client to the judge with the issue.

My2penneth

So, almost £29 million quid to sort out the accounts...! That's probably more than SVS had ever made in profit in all the years.  How can that level of costs ever be justifiable? 

Thrugelmir

My2penneth said:

So, almost £29 million quid to sort out the accounts...! That's probably more than SVS had ever made in profit in all the years.  How can that level of costs ever be justifiable? 

Time costs money. The more work that's created the greater the bill. 

Sheris

Thrugelmir said:

My2penneth said:

So, almost £29 million quid to sort out the accounts...! That's probably more than SVS had ever made in profit in all the years.  How can that level of costs ever be justifiable? 

Time costs money. The more work that's created the greater the bill. 

Yes and my time costs money, still waiting for dividends from January.  

Ravima

I wonder what would have sorted them out? There was the £2.5/5m Bond, but even at £5m, a loan/grant/injection from FCA would not have cost £30m, plus the grief of the customers!

snipkin

Two articles on ITI's takeover of SVS client book ("Broker onboards 5,000 SVS clients after challenging year" and "‘Proud’ ITI says thousands of SVS clients can finally access cash").

Quote: "About 5,000 clients of failed discretionary fund manager SVS Securities have now been onboarded to broker ITI Capital’s trading platform, after facing challenges in the past year. According to ITI Capital, it has also completed more than 2,200 transfer-out requests, with just a handful of “unresponsive clients” left for verification. In addition, ITI Capital said about 4,000 clients with minimal balances have yet to respond to their account activation request, despite repeated letters, emails, and phone calls." End quote.

The figures seem low. 5,000 clients onboarded? 2,200 transfer-out requests? Perhaps most were fortunate enough to have had 'minimal balances'. It seems 4,000 did not even respond at all. Were the remainder (I thought there were c17-19K clients?) FX clients?

Link 1: https://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2021/05/17/broker-onboards-5-000-svs-clients-after-challenging-year/

LInk 2: https://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/proud-iti-says-thousands-of-svs-clients-can-finally-access-cash/a1508782