SVS Securities - shut down?

masonic

johnburman said:

A more interesting point is why it took the FCA soooo long to act?   

One of the few things that can be relied upon about the FCA is that they are always slow to act.

SteveJohnson56

masonic said:

SteveJohnson56 said:

johnburman said:

This is on the ITI Website:

ITI Capital Limited has made the decision to exit the retail client business in the UK by 21st December 2022.

Dear Client,

ITI Capital Limited has made the decision to exit the retail client business in the UK by 21st December 2022.

We are providing these FAQ’s to help answer any questions you might have.

Key Dates:

22nd July 2022; Clients will not be able to open any new positions, but can close positions.

25th November 2022; All Retail client open positions must be closed.

21st December 2022; All Retail client accounts will be closed at ITI Capital Limited.

Our dedicated account management and dealing team will be on hand to answer any questions you might have but we do ask you to have a look at these FAQ’s which will also be available on our website.

Kind Regards,

ITI Capital

RasputinB said:

Or, in the words of the FCA - "ITI Capital Limited must complete the closure of all retail client services by 21 December 2022 (or a date agreed with the independent third party to the satisfaction of the FCA)".

They also said that "ITI Capital Limited must hold a minimum of £4m in cash" and that this cash is a) To make client redress payments, b) To meet costs associated with any additional remedial actions required by the Authority, c) To ensure that, in the event of firm wind-down, this can be completed in an orderly manner, or d) In any other circumstances, with the express consent of the Authority.

An independent third party was supposed to have been appointed to oversee the orderly closure and the return (or transfer if appropriate to another provider’s custodian) of all retail client monies and custody assets. Should that third party be expected to help with the redress payments? (From what Degiro have said, it looks like they are already failing with the management of orderly transfers.) 

I've had a provisional award from an ombudsman at the FOS due to be finalised in the next 3 weeks, will that £4m cash be used to pay out the FOS awards against ITI?

Or will I receive nada?

It should be used for that yes. But in the situation where ITI goes into administration, your FOS award can be taken to the FSCS (though it would come out of your overall £85k compensation limit if you have to claim for lost assets as well).

Thanks for that info.

Josl

RasputinB said:

I find it infuriating that the FOS and the Ombudsmen often won't take facts as presented by the complainants but expect the guilty company to confess before the FOS is happy to properly award judgement. This unfair bias is deplorable. Here is the guff -

"The investigator thought cash was received on 15 September as referred to by Mr A in response to some questions he was asked. But I note his bank statement he sent to us states receipt of cash was 16 October 2020 as did his letter of complaint. So, I think this is more likely the date of receipt but if there is any doubt, this needs to be agreed between Mr A and ITI before payment of the interest award is made."

The FOS is expected to resolve complaints; not leave them open ended. What a farce.

FOS exist only to exhaust the complaint process. All of investigator/ombudsman efforts are to ensure to kill or limit damage to the business. No matter how wrongful business behaves. 

In an ideal world, ombudsman should decide. Firm must pay this much in inconvenience, interest on late payment and so on. Also must make payment within 2 weeks. FOS is not fit for purpose.

Josl

johnburman said:

And to Josi

If the monies owned are >£750, you can issue an immediate winding up petition.  That will get their attention.

Cost of winding up petition exceeds my damage. Late payment interest + late award payment interest + FOS award comes up around £1500 or so

Fees

The fees are:

• £302 - court fees
• £2,600 - petition deposit (to manage the ‘winding-up’)

You might be able to get the fees back if the company can afford to repay them.

————

To ask court to enforce the ombudsman decision cost £44. In case of insolvancy, appointed administrators are required to pay out existing court decisions.

masonic

Josl said:

To ask court to enforce the ombudsman decision cost £44. In case of insolvancy, appointed administrators are required to pay out existing court decisions.

...If the company has sufficient assets. You join the list of unsecured creditors where there is a court order or warrant/writ of control. Behind the priority and secured creditors.

Josl said:

RasputinB said:

I find it infuriating that the FOS and the Ombudsmen often won't take facts as presented by the complainants but expect the guilty company to confess before the FOS is happy to properly award judgement. This unfair bias is deplorable. Here is the guff -

"The investigator thought cash was received on 15 September as referred to by Mr A in response to some questions he was asked. But I note his bank statement he sent to us states receipt of cash was 16 October 2020 as did his letter of complaint. So, I think this is more likely the date of receipt but if there is any doubt, this needs to be agreed between Mr A and ITI before payment of the interest award is made."

The FOS is expected to resolve complaints; not leave them open ended. What a farce.

FOS exist only to exhaust the complaint process. All of investigator/ombudsman efforts are to ensure to kill or limit damage to the business. No matter how wrongful business behaves. 

In an ideal world, ombudsman should decide. Firm must pay this much in inconvenience, interest on late payment and so on. Also must make payment within 2 weeks. FOS is not fit for purpose.

It's a bit of a lottery - dependent on which adjudicator/investigator/ombudsman you get, but the inability for the FOS to punish a firm for bad behaviour is by design and legislation. Their hands are tied. It is also by design and legislation that they do not have enforcement powers, and that an Ombudsman decision has instead been given the effect of a court order. But it is better than a court order if the firm goes into administration. Other ADR services do have enforcement powers, such as the Energy Ombudsman, but I haven't heard great things about the way those work when a firm fails to pay the consumer. Enforcement through the court system is probably the lesser of two evils.

johnburman

Masonic, very right as always, but if you "lose out" in an administration in that the liabilities of the company are more than the assets, does not the FSCS pay your loss?

Plus if the award from the ombudsman is >£750 you can issue your own winding-up petition.  Yes it is expensive and you pay a deposit, but you should get that back 

masonic

johnburman said:

Masonic, very right as always, but if you "lose out" in an administration in that the liabilities of the company are more than the assets, does not the FSCS pay your loss?

Plus if the award from the ombudsman is >£750 you can issue your own winding-up petition.  Yes it is expensive and you pay a deposit, but you should get that back 

You can take a FOS decision to the FSCS. An early contributor to this thread, englishmas, had an award against SVS that needed to be claimed in this way. A court order doesn't allow you to do that, but if you try to enforce a FOS decision through the courts and fail due to insolvency, it should still be possible to fall back to the FSCS using the original FOS award letter.

Josl has already quoted some information about issuing a winding-up petition, in particular "You might be able to get the fees back if the company can afford to repay them." The £302 court fee is not a negligible amount, and I don't know whether the £2,600 deposit is guaranteed to be refunded in all circumstances.

johnburman

The fees for any winding up petition are paid first, before other payments to creditors

masonic

johnburman said:

The fees for any winding up petition are paid first, before other payments to creditors

They won't rank ahead of secured creditors with fixed charges over particular assets, administrator's fees, employees with unpaid wages, HMRC for VAT and PAYE, etc. Assets under management are ring-fenced and cannot be used to settle court fees. There is always a risk that the directors of a company that's sinking get desperate and 'disappear' other assets. Someone issuing a winding-up petition must have a great deal of confidence in the continued survival of the business and/or that there are assets remaining within the business that can be used to meet their claim.

In the calendar year 2020, ITI Capital Limited had £6.7m in net assets and made a loss of £2.1m. They made a loss of £2.8m the year before. I doubt the situation has reversed in 2021 or 2022, especially with everything that's happened. Would have to be trusting that the capital requirements were still being adhered to even now.

bottleandahalf

What is going on with these jokers.

Phoned 5 times today, to receive a password for an account that was never opened for me.

Said they sent the email 4 times and still received nought.

Looking to sell my 1 holding and end this nightmare just