SVS Securities - shut down?

RasputinB

4 more additions to Ombudsman decisions -
DRN-3691014 - ITI wanted £50 for a share certificate. They didn't provide it so refunded the £50 plus £100 D&I awarded. Ombudsman stated "ITI should arrange for a share certificate in Mr P’s name for his shareholding in Company A. Or alternatively provide written evidence for Mr P from the registrar and/or liquidator that this is not possible". Customer also has data concerns.

DRN-3758606 - £350 D&I ITI offered £125

DRN-3564281 - £350 D&I ITI initially offered £125

DRN-3763896 - £250 D&I - IMO a totally unrealistic amount considering ITI's accounting mess that the Ombudsman has left unresolved.

johnburman

all seems to show

The FOS awards are ( too) low
iti is a disgrace to the UK financial services industry 
treating clients fairly seems to be a forgotten concept in the UK despite the FCA Regs saying the contrary 

SamAus

Dear All,

Several months into the transfer process and still no progress. Can I ask if anyone here complained to Leonard Curtis themselves for selecting such a horrendous outfit to transfer all our assets to? Then, did anyone escalate to the Insolvency Practitioner Complaint process, the regulatory body for Leonard Curtis? I am starting to lose all hope of ever receiving my assets back. 

Josl

SamAus said:

Dear All,

Several months into the transfer process and still no progress. Can I ask if anyone here complained to Leonard Curtis themselves for selecting such a horrendous outfit to transfer all our assets to? Then, did anyone escalate to the Insolvency Practitioner Complaint process, the regulatory body for Leonard Curtis? I am starting to lose all hope of ever receiving my assets back. 

I filed a complaint with LC demanding explanation for their choice. Their Manager Craig replied back “We chose a firm fully regulated by the FCA. Broker was chosen without objections from the FCA and FSCS during the insolvency process.” (Two bodies had veto rights) 

Insolvency practitioner investigation cleared the three named bankruptcy officials of all charges of negligence as they have not broken court procedures. 

Buck stops with the FCA. They investigated SVS in 2017 and failed to follow up. Then turned up in June 2019 to pick up from where they left off. By then SVS had filed for insolvancy. FCA then allowed ITI to continue to regulate despite an US outright ban on all ITI activities in the US on fraud. ITI were fined here in UK on similar charges of manipulating exchange data before it was passed onto its clients. Allowing such broker tainted with history of fraud was an unforgivable act as demonstrated by the failures of ITI and its ensuing saga. FOS has no authority except to undercut customer claims, limit damages for the business and exhaust complaint process.
FCA enjoys a blanket immunity from the same kangaroo uk courts/law. 

Protections boosted by the FCA and FSCS are not worth the paper they are written on. Our money was as safe with the FSCS as it would have been had we invested with Bernie Madoff or Sam Bankman-fried.

SamAus

Josl said:

SamAus said:

Dear All,

Several months into the transfer process and still no progress. Can I ask if anyone here complained to Leonard Curtis themselves for selecting such a horrendous outfit to transfer all our assets to? Then, did anyone escalate to the Insolvency Practitioner Complaint process, the regulatory body for Leonard Curtis? I am starting to lose all hope of ever receiving my assets back. 

I filed a complaint with LC demanding explanation for their choice. Their Manager Craig replied back “We chose a firm fully regulated by the FCA. Broker was chosen without objections from the FCA and FSCS during the insolvency process.” (Two bodies had veto rights) 

Insolvency practitioner investigation cleared the three named bankruptcy officials of all charges of negligence as they have not broken court procedures. 

Buck stops with the FCA. They investigated SVS in 2017 and failed to follow up. Then turned up in June 2019 to pick up from where they left off. By then SVS had filed for insolvancy. FCA then allowed ITI to continue to regulate despite an US outright ban on all ITI activities in the US on fraud. ITI were fined here in UK on similar charges of manipulating exchange data before it was passed onto its clients. Allowing such broker tainted with history of fraud was an unforgivable act as demonstrated by the failures of ITI and its ensuing saga. FOS has no authority except to undercut customer claims, limit damages for the business and exhaust complaint process.
FCA enjoys a blanket immunity from the same kangaroo uk courts/law. 

Protections boosted by the FCA and FSCS are not worth the paper they are written on. Our money was as safe with the FSCS as it would have been had we invested with Bernie Madoff or Sam Bankman-fried.

Thanks, this is sincerely appreciated. Did anyone, including yourself try and get investigative journalism involved? Given the current Bank of England's previous stint leading the FCA, and questionable competence both now and then, I am sure the papers would love this. This is a complete disgrace, and the media would have a field day if they truly got to the bottom of this. I also note, that the lady (Account Management Intern) who seems to be dealing with the return of all our assets is based in Moscow (sanctions, anyone?). I am running out of ideas to get my money back.

SamAus

Sorry given the current Chairman of the BOEs previous leading of the FCA, rather

johnburman

sorry guys but this exchange of views is a repeat of previous postings

LC chose iti
FCA registered iti
no objections were raised. ITI were confident that they could take on the new clients... or so they thought 
they were not. 
Who is liable for this? 
seemingly no one. 
Financial Advisor published a piece but no one else 
and it's the client's who suffered. locked out of their assets whilst the Special Administration was completed, they were further locked out by ITIs it systemic problems 

But if you have lost real cash, make a claim on the FOS. you'll GET £ 300-400 as a contribution towards your 'inconvenience' 

Josl

SamAus said:

Sorry given the current Chairman of the BOEs previous leading of the FCA, rather

Sadly, complaining about negligence/criminal behaviour gets you nowhere in the UK. Media are as useless as the rest of the setup. Several users here contacted financial media outlets. Andrew Bailey is as incompetent as any other individual. He got the job at BOE by being anti-EU. It’s a political appointment not based on merit.

FOS may offer you £250 which seems be the threshold for inconvenience. Don’t expect ITI to pay you that award. Several investors are awaiting for months for that payout

Josl

RasputinB said:

More wheels falling off at the FOS -
"We're aware that the decisions database is not showing full results right now, and that some decisions files aren't available. We're working to resolve this as soon as possible."
So much for transparency!

I had the same response from ICO. A normal working Country would have issued a heavy fine for such appalling failure to service clients. Broken Britain is officially a failed state.

johnburman

an award against ITI that is not paid can be enforced by the courts