SVS Securities - shut down?

masonic

johnburman said:

The statement from Lloyds bank should be publicised and the papers and the FCA told

This is a serious story 

Enforcement action is already being taken against ITI by the FCA, and it is no longer permitted to take on new retail clients in the UK.

Think about the potential consequences of putting opinions about these security risks into the public domain. Existing clients currently have options for transferring out. No reputable broker would leave the door open to accepting a transfer from ITI if it becomes widely acknowledged that they would be putting their business at risk. The situation could get very ugly for the stranded clients.

So far all that is out there is a Trustpilot review and some posts here, all from consumers. Nothing public from Lloyds, other than a general statement about cybersecurity not linked to any specific threat.

El_D365

kencom said:

johnburman said:

Can't give you any advice on your query. But if iti are not answering their phones:

Complain to the FCA. And then to the FOS for compensation for AT LEAST the inconvenience caused by ITIs conduct 

Thanks for the advice. But I really just want confirmation of the correct transfer method before the deadline.

First I opened an account with Interactive Brokers.  I emailed ITI's accountsmanagement email address, and requested that they transfer my holdings by contacting Interactive Brokers.

ITI acknowledged my request, and cc'd me in an email where they asked IB to send them a transfer form for me.

The transfer process stalled there, with me sending emails to ITI and IB asking for updates, and IB pointing the finger at ITI saying they weren't responding.

I then emailed ITI's accountmanagement that I was formally complaining, raising the matter with the FCA, and demanded that they contact IB to transfer my holdings.

I received a reply from that email address apologising, and confirmation that they had emailed IB to begin the transfer process.

I asked ITI to email me proof, which they did (a screen grab of their request).

My holdings were transferred 2 or 3 days after that.  A month after my initial request though.

A few points which might have worked in my favour.  I was a client with ITI before they took on all the SVS customers.  I was 'onboarded' a couple of years ago.  My holdings were in 'Phoenix', so actually already in an Interactive Broker account the whole time.

RasputinB

masonic said:

johnburman said:

The statement from Lloyds bank should be publicised and the papers and the FCA told

This is a serious story 

Enforcement action is already being taken against ITI by the FCA, and it is no longer permitted to take on new retail clients in the UK.

Think about the potential consequences of putting opinions about these security risks into the public domain. Existing clients currently have options for transferring out. No reputable broker would leave the door open to accepting a transfer from ITI if it becomes widely acknowledged that they would be putting their business at risk. The situation could get very ugly for the stranded clients.

So far all that is out there is a Trustpilot review and some posts here, all from consumers. Nothing public from Lloyds, other than a general statement about cybersecurity not linked to any specific threat.

Almost two years ago I said “I think that saying too much at this stage could be counter-productive …we might all be in a much greater mess if ITI Capital was shut down by regulators”.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77606641/#Comment_77606641

Now that most people have had adequate time to extract their assets, I think that the time is right to consider the data implications.

Although ownership of ITI has become murkier there is little doubt that it started as an off-shoot of ITI Capital in Moscow aka Joint Stock Investment Company IT Invest / Акционерное общество Инвестиционная компания Ай Ти Инвест.

Web pages referred to in-house software and it is highly likely that this was the QORT platform and that it was developed and supported by Russian companies - either ITI Capital in Moscow or another part of the ITI / Da Vinci Capital group.

The BIG problem is that “Russian law [ ] contains legal obligations on companies to assist the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB)”. FSB = KGB in old money. See https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/ncsc-rethink-russian-supply-chain/ .

You can find details of Case No. AKPI18-1109 of 19 December 2018 where the Russian Supreme Court confirmed the powers of the FSB to have constant access to user's data https://www.dataguidance.com/notes/russia-data-protection-overview

Thanks to the recent “ContiLeaks” it is possible to get an idea of how such personal data can be used. Conti allegedly gained $180m from extortion and data theft in 2021.

https://securitybrief.com.au/story/what-we-can-learn-from-the-leaked-conti-ransomware-group-chats

If my assumptions are correct and the FSB has been able to gain possible access to our personal data then what should we do to –

a)     Protect ourselves from misuse of that data?

b)     Obtain compensation for any costs involved in such protection?

masonic

RasputinB said:

If my assumptions are correct and the FSB has been able to gain possible access to our personal data then what should we do to –

a)     Protect ourselves from misuse of that data?

b)     Obtain compensation for any costs involved in such protection?

A problem that is immediately faced is that there is currently a Russian asset at the very top of UK Government. The conclusions of HSDL do paint the whole selection process in quite a different light.

Feel free to come into the fold of those of us who are trying to get redress over the FCA's failings. The Complaints Commissioner has recently sent me an update that once again they'll be deferring my complaint from 2018 regarding another matter until after May 2023. The Treasury Select Committee and my MP seem unwilling to take any action beyond writing soothing words.

Perhaps a complaint, suitably escalated to the FOS if necessary, can include costs associated with credit monitoring, but I'm not convinced this has much value in times when a credit report can be obtained for free and updated weekly. There are uses of personal information other than identity theft that would be very difficult to protect against or link to any specific event.

RasputinB

If anyone doubts that ITI Capital in London still has links to Russian IT services they can test as follows –

Insert iticapital.com into http://www.dnscheck.pro/

This will give a DNS check report for iticapital.com

Scroll down to MAIL and look at the “Check SPF record” where you will find “include:spf.sendsay.ru”.

The English version of sendsay.ru webpages state that “Sendsay is a completely Russian product. Our servers are located in several secure data centers in Russia, and all software of our service is Russian.”

Sendsay also appears in the DNS check report for ITI Capital in Moscow i.e. iticapital.ru

My2penneth

Well, still trying to get a last chunk of cash out of ITI Crapital (only a small amount). They sold shares in the QORT account on 18th August. I submitted the withdrawal request on 24th August. Still not received the cash. It has taken near a month to transfer a small sum of cash. 

The worse company I have dealt with by a country mile.

manted

@My2penneth - Dont know if you have had a chance to read the DRN here - https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-3354239.pdf
Seems like in some cases, the FOS are paying 8% interest for delays in clearing money. Although, the FOS themselves might take ages to pass that judgement.

RasputinB

A couple of further ITI Capital restrictions dated 12/9/2022 have appeared on the FCA website. ITI Capital Limited (fca.org.uk)

One states that ITI Capital “must not close, encash, liquidate, or transfer any client positions without specific client instructions to do so” and that they must “ensure clients are made aware of relevant risks such as when crystallising a loss or where they are breaking a tax wrapper”.

RasputinB

Added to Ombudsman decisions today DRN-3600094 - £350 D&I payment. ITI offered £150
and DRN-3577044 £700 D&I payment.
"We didn’t receive anything from ITI Capital in response to the investigator’s findings" - becoming standard now?
Note that further D&I payments should be payable due to the data protection issues that can now be raised.
A further decision DRN-3354239 appeared a week or so ago but is of less interest.

johnburman

Well done Rasputin B

The quote i saw in the Decision from the FOS is:

The transfer was requested in early August 2020 and didn’t complete until in December. As transfers like this should take no longer than 30 days, this one took too long. 

A killer quote.  But what Data Protection issues?  Unless you suffer a real (cash) loss caused by a DP breach, under Google v Lloyd case, no compensation.

But £350 for D&I is good: it's gone up from £300