Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MK62
    • By MK62 3rd Aug 19, 6:05 AM
    • 476Posts
    • 349Thanks
    MK62
    SVS Securities - shut down?
    • #1
    • 3rd Aug 19, 6:05 AM
    SVS Securities - shut down? 3rd Aug 19 at 6:05 AM
    I tried to access my account this morning and it just times out (eventually).

    There are some rumours online that it shut down yesterday, but it's not exactly plastered all over the place, and I've never heard of the sites carrying the rumours (so no idea how reliable they are).

    https://www.shareprophets.com/views/44019/breaking-svs-securities-shutting-down

    https://www.valuethemarkets.com/2019/08/02/svs-securities-another-broker-bites-the-dust-how-much-trouble-is-aim-in/

    I did a quick search on here but came up with nothing.....this kind of thing is usually on here pretty quickly though tbh....
    Last edited by MK62; 03-08-2019 at 6:12 AM. Reason: Added links
Page 25
    • dales1
    • By dales1 16th Sep 19, 11:16 PM
    • 105 Posts
    • 101 Thanks
    dales1
    Within your user control panel on your MSE forum account (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/usercp.php) you can go into 'Date & Time Options' and make it display whatever you prefer.
    Originally posted by bowlhead99
    But first you will need to press Edit Options to get this choice.
    Dales
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 16th Sep 19, 11:55 PM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    But first you will need to press Edit Options to get this choice.
    Dales
    Originally posted by dales1
    Yes, if you are in the control panel and you want to change the options I suppose the first thing to do is to press the relevant button to say that you want to edit the options.
    • johnburman
    • By johnburman 18th Sep 19, 8:19 AM
    • 85 Posts
    • 19 Thanks
    johnburman
    I see LC say in their updated letter that there are several hundred SVS clients who may face losses. Any idea who are these likely to be? Any of them XO clients?
    • johnburman
    • By johnburman 18th Sep 19, 8:30 AM
    • 85 Posts
    • 19 Thanks
    johnburman
    I have just seen this press release. My underlining. How come they get paid out in 7 days whilst SVS clients have to wait?

    =====

    East London Credit Union Ltd declared in default: FSCS to protect 5,500 members
    The Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) has stepped in to protect the members of East London Credit Union Ltd, trading as Waltham Forest Community Credit Union, which has stopped trading and is now in default.

    FSCS will compensate within seven days the vast majority of the 5,500 members of the Walthamstow-based credit union. Using East London Credit Union Ltd’s records, FSCS will send payments out automatically.

    Members with up to 1,000 in their account will receive a letter to get cash over the counter at their local Post Office. Anyone with a balance of more than 1,000 will receive a cheque for their balance direct from FSCS.

    FSCS protects up to 85,000 of savings – double that for joint accounts – and has come to the aid of more than 4.5m people since 2001, paying out over 26bn in compensation.

    FSCS expects the total payout for East London Credit Union Ltd to be just over 2,250,000.

    Caroline Rainbird, Chief Executive of FSCS, said:

    “FSCS is protecting the members of East London Credit Union Ltd and helping them to get back on track. Our aim is for the vast majority of its customers to get their money back within seven days.

    “All members of the credit union need to know that their money is safe and about the safeguards that are in place. Their savings are protected up to 85,000, and joint accounts are covered for 170,000.

    “FSCS covers a wide range of products and services. As well as for claims against a credit union, bank or building society, customers can be assured that should they lose money due to the failure of an authorised financial services firm, such as their investment or mortgage adviser, or debt management provider, that FSCS provides protection of up to 85,000 per person.”

    For more information on how FSCS helps people with current or savings accounts in banks, building societies and credit unions, please visit FSCS’s website and see our compensation limits page.

    Queries about East London Credit Union Ltd can be directed to Stephen Cork of Cork Gully LLP, who has been appointed as liquidator. The liquidator can be contacted by telephone in the first instance on 0333 210 1548.
    • englishmas
    • By englishmas 18th Sep 19, 8:34 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    englishmas
    Reading in between the lines , I think The X_O accounts are safe , though they may have to pay LC fee,
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 18th Sep 19, 8:52 AM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    I have just seen this press release. My underlining. How come they get paid out in 7 days whilst SVS clients have to wait?
    Originally posted by johnburman
    The customers of the credit union had deposits of known amounts, which were maintained by the CU, and so they are creditors of the business. The business is in default and can't pay the money that it owes, but the amount it owes to the customers for those deposit accounts is known, so FSCS depositary protection steps in and pays out the customers. If FSCS can later get a bit of the money back from the business, it will.

    SVS was not a bank or credit union. It didn't hold customer deposits. So FSCS are not expected to step in to recover those deposits. In the SVS situation, FSCS can't just pay you off the amount of your deposit that was owed to you by a failed bank, because there isn't a failed bank that owes you a deposit back.

    Instead, the execution-only customers of SVS's stockbroking business have various financial assets, which need to be sorted out and a solution found to getting the customer's assets back into their own hands. If there is an eventual loss once everything is sorted out (e.g. due to bad recordkeeping, issues with title or fraud, administrator needing to be paid out of the customer assets held if the business itself has no assets, etc), FSCS will help out, within limits.
    Last edited by bowlhead99; 18-09-2019 at 8:55 AM.
    • Eastneuk
    • By Eastneuk 18th Sep 19, 9:00 AM
    • 7 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    Eastneuk
    I’ve received a call from “Pension Claims Specialist” who knew I was a client of SVS and after telling the person to take a hike, I was wondering how they got hold of my mobile number. Has LC been selling our data or someone from within what remains of SVS?
    • pafpcg
    • By pafpcg 18th Sep 19, 9:10 AM
    • 406 Posts
    • 374 Thanks
    pafpcg
    I see LC say in their updated letter that there are several hundred SVS clients who may face losses. Any idea who are these likely to be? Any of them XO clients?
    Originally posted by johnburman
    If you're referring to the paragraph on page three of the letter, then the answer is given in the rest of the paragraph! [Either because the SVS client is ineligible for FSCS protection or their assets with SVS are greater than 85,000.]

    My understanding is that clients of SVS XO are being treated the same as all the other SVS clients so they will all suffer a loss (assuming that the overall SVS liabilities exceed the overall assets); this loss will be mitigated by compensation from FSCS (if the client is eligible) up to 85,000 per client. Unless LC have already calculated the overall shortfall in SVS assets against liabilities, then they will have assumed the worst case, 100% loss, and set the portfolio threshold at 85,000. Until the overall shortfall is known, the number of clients who will actually suffer a real loss is just speculation.
    • englishmas
    • By englishmas 18th Sep 19, 9:15 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    englishmas
    FSCS will only deals withe the compensation claims by SVS clients after LC finish their work, I tried to contact FSCS regarding my claim and so for they have not even acknowledged my letter, even my claim is nothing to do with LC.
    • johnburman
    • By johnburman 18th Sep 19, 9:25 AM
    • 85 Posts
    • 19 Thanks
    johnburman
    Couple of points

    1 XO clients have assets that belong to them not to SVS. They are not true 'clients' in the sense they do not deposit money to be used by a bank, but they pay for transactions...they are beneficailly entitled to *their* (client) assets and (client) money.

    2 Because of 1 payments shodul be quicker not slower (!)

    2A you say FSCS will only deals withe the compensation claims by SVS clients after LC finish their work but why? And will they pay interest for the delay? Have you asked?

    3 See below extract from FT Advisor (with my underlining). SIPP SVS clients try the FOS!

    Tenet to pay out for Sipp advice
    Tenet to pay out for Sipp advice
    By Rachel Mortimer


    The Financial Ombudsman Service has ordered TenetConnect to compensate a client who was unsuitably advised to switch his pension by one of its appointed representatives.

    The client was first introduced to the appointed representative by a loans company which subsequently lent him money to invest in unlisted securities.

    The appointed representative advised the client to switch his personal pension to a self-invested personal pension with SVS Securities, which recently entered administration after the Financial Conduct Authority conducted "urgent" supervisory work at the firm, and a total of 20,321 was invested in SVS, Guardia and Titanium International.

    In a decision published in July the ombudsman found one of these companies, SVS, had now failed and the other two had "significantly fallen in value".

    When the client complained to Tenet about the adviser, who he believed had mis-sold the Sipp and bought too many shares in the companies without proper due diligence, the network said it had no knowledge of the advice provided by its appointed representative.

    Tenet maintained no paperwork associated with regulated financial advice existed and it had not received any commission - it also argued neither the SVS Sipp nor the unlisted securities products approved by Tenet and its appointed representatives were only authorised to advise on approved products.

    But the ombudsman ruled in favour of the client despite Tenet's objections, finding the company was liable for the unsuitable advice provided by its appointed representative regardless of whether part of it technically fell outside of the network's responsibilities.

    Despite acknowledging the advice process was "not well documented" ombudsman Michael Stubbs said it was "more likely than not" that the appointed representative had advised on the pension switch because the adviser was paid a fee of 1,000 for his part in helping the client take out the Sipp and was listed as the client's adviser on the supporting application.

    Mr Stubbs agreed neither the SVS Sipp nor the unlisted securities were products Tenet had authorised its appointed representatives to advise on and therefore advising on these products fell outside of the authority granted to the adviser.

    But the ombudsman ruled the original advice for the client to surrender his existing personal pension policy did fall within the authority granted by Tenet, and that the two pieces of advice were so closely linked as to bring the entirety under the responsibility of the network.

    The ombudsman's decision followed a ruling by the High Court in a case involving Tenet that if a piece of regulated advice and unregulated advice were "inextricably linked" they could be constituted as a single piece of regulated advice.

    Mr Stubbs said: "As I said earlier the client was advised to switch his personal pension to a Sipp and to then invest in unquoted shares. The whole purpose of the advice was to enable the client to purchase the shares.

    "Without the purchase of the shares the loan that the client was looking to obtain would not have been forthcoming. I therefore consider that the various elements of this advice are inextricably linked – without the pension switch there would have been no share purchase.
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 18th Sep 19, 9:36 AM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    FSCS will only deals withe the compensation claims by SVS clients after LC finish their work, I tried to contact FSCS regarding my claim and so for they have not even acknowledged my letter, even my claim is nothing to do with LC.
    Originally posted by englishmas
    I'm not sure what your 'claim' is for, and why it is nothing to do with LC. The company still exists, and is in administration. LC are administering SVS Securities plc and sorting through the assets and will provide more information on how you should go about making claims in due course.

    There's no real point going to FSCS and saying you need to be compensated because the company didn't pay you out, when you have not given the SVS administrators the chance to pay you out as they conclude their work.

    If your claim is not to do with SVS holding your assets but instead relates to SVS giving you bad advice, again you should be complaining to SVS first, which is how it works for all regulated firms that are not yet defunct.
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 18th Sep 19, 9:49 AM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    1 XO clients have assets that belong to them not to SVS. They are not true 'clients' in the sense they do not deposit money to be used by a bank, but they pay for transactions...they are beneficailly entitled to *their* (client) assets and (client) money.

    2 Because of 1 payments shodul be quicker not slower (!)
    Originally posted by johnburman
    As you agree, the SVS XO clients do not have deposits because SVS is not a depositary business. So, FSCS depositary protection does not apply and you can forget getting a quick payout of your deposited cash.

    Yes, these execution-only clients are entitled to their client assets and client money, if it exists. What currently exists is a load of client assets and a pool of client money. After LC have finished sorting through it all (and taken their costs of dealing with and distributing the client assets and cash, out of the client assets and cash), the remainder of the client assets and cash can be distributed to its owners (e.g., you).

    As LC are arranging for client assets and cash to be put back into the hands of the clients (e.g. by transferring investments to another viable nominee/ custodian business), and have not yet finalised the claim process, it would be pretty surprising if the FSCS sent you a cheque for that money tomorrow: because your assets still exist and are in the process of being sorted through and returned.

    I have not been following the entire thread so don't know whether you have seen and understood the FAQs published at https://www.leonardcurtis.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Consolidated-FAQs-12.09.2019.pdf
    • englishmas
    • By englishmas 18th Sep 19, 9:53 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    englishmas
    My claim is the to recover the compensation awarded by the ombudsman against SVS, wrote to LC, they told me my claim is nothing to do with them and I have to take up with FSCS, I have written to FSCS twice and no response. Then I am told that anything relate to SVS will be consider until LC finish their work.
    So I am stuck, any suggestions
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 18th Sep 19, 11:33 AM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    My claim is the to recover the compensation awarded by the ombudsman against SVS, wrote to LC, they told me my claim is nothing to do with them and I have to take up with FSCS, I have written to FSCS twice and no response. Then I am told that anything relate to SVS will be consider until LC finish their work.
    Originally posted by englishmas
    LC as special administrator probably have lots of people claiming all sorts of things from them at the moment. If the ombudsman has told SVS Securities plc to pay you out a compensation award, and SVS have not yet paid you, you will be just one of many creditors of SVS. There are lots of people to pay and not enough money to go round. LC will be looking to wind up the company or transfer its business in the best interests of its creditors, and you are one of the creditors.

    If your compensation is not eventually paid by the company, or only partly paid because they can't afford to pay all that they owe, FSCS may step in for the shortfall (within limits). But at the moment, SVS still exists as a regulated entity and LC have not finished their work to return client assets/client money and to rescue/wind up the company in the best interests of its creditors. Only once that work has finished, and it's known whether they were able to pay you anything, can FSCS get involved.

    It seems too early for FSCS to pay you out now. The usual steps with your situation would be:
    - ombudsman makes a direction or money award;
    - customer waits for the actions to be taken or money to be paid;
    - if it doesn't happen, customer goes back to ombudsman and tells them it hasn't happened;
    - ombudsman follows up with company
    - if company fails to pay because they are out of business, customer goes to FSCS and makes a claim.

    The first thing for you to do is to go to ombudsman and say that the compensation you were awarded hasn't been paid within a reasonable time, please could they follow it up. They would then contact SVS/LC themselves, or advise you of next steps.

    Another thing you could do is to go to LC and say you want to check that you are on the list of creditors in relation to the compensation award which FOS had directed to be paid to you. Though it seems it might be better to try and have FOS do that for you.

    It doesn't seem like the time is yet right for you to go to FSCS and make a claim that LC was wound up without you being paid out, because LC has not yet been wound up.
    • manorhouse
    • By manorhouse 18th Sep 19, 12:34 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    manorhouse
    Svs.
    Have we gone back to suggesting XO clients will not get all there shares back in full ?
    • englishmas
    • By englishmas 18th Sep 19, 12:44 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    englishmas
    Hi Bowlhead99

    Thanks for the response.

    according to ombudsman compensation calculation my compensation way above the 85k, I thought it will be the case as you suggested, I wrote to the LC , they told me that it is not in their remits to deal with the compensation part of my claim , only the remaining assets with the SVS.
    I went back to the FCS, they told me as for as they are concern my case is closed as Judgement has been made and I have accepted it and advice me to contact FSCS.
    I wrote a letter to FSCS saying that as the compensation part of my claim is not being consider by the LC so can I ask then (FSCS) to pay this part, but no response , as you may know that any compensation awarded by the ombudsman is subject to 8% interest and this is due now.

    I have some remaining shares and cash in my SVS account , i presume with time I will get back from LC, but I am not clear how to go about getting the compensation. ( though it is more than 85K and I am hoping that I will get 85K from some one. 8% interest is due from this month also.
    Any suggestion please.
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 18th Sep 19, 1:06 PM
    • 9,394 Posts
    • 17,085 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    Have we gone back to suggesting XO clients will not get all there shares back in full ?
    Originally posted by manorhouse
    Had we gone away from it?

    It is not known whether they will get their assets back in full, because the special administrators haven't finished their assessment to confirm that the supposedly ring-fenced assets all exist (at least, that is what they said in the most recent version of the FAQ) ; and once they have finished their assessment and get into the distribution process, they are entitled to take their costs of dealing with and distributing the client assets and pool of cash, out of the client assets and pool of cash.

    Investors may qualify for FSCS compensation if they get back less than what SVS was holding for them, so may still overall get their value in full, even if they don't 'get there shares back in full'. The FAQ from a few days ago was linked above.


    I have some remaining shares and cash in my SVS account , i presume with time I will get back from LC, but I am not clear how to go about getting the compensation. ( though it is more than 85K and I am hoping that I will get 85K from some one. 8% interest is due from this month also.
    Any suggestion please.
    Originally posted by englishmas
    LC probably don't have much interest in paying your compensation claim ahead of anyone else's claims on the company's assets. If it's not within LC's remit to deal with deciding whether or not to agree to process a FOS money award (as they do have a limited remit), you probably shouldn't expect to have it paid by SVS before SVS winds up. All you can do is wait until they have finished paying everyone out (including returning your shares and cash) and then - assuming they don't pay you the compo as part of that process - go to FSCS and claim to be compensated by them for the obligations of the failed firm.
    • englishmas
    • By englishmas 18th Sep 19, 1:12 PM
    • 32 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    englishmas
    Hi

    in fact it was LC who advice me to go to FSCS as they will not consider it
    • manorhouse
    • By manorhouse 18th Sep 19, 7:31 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    manorhouse
    bowlhead99
    and once they have finished their assessment and get into the distribution process, they are entitled to take their costs of dealing with and distributing the client assets and pool of cash, out of the client assets and pool of cash.

    We know with Beaufort they just paid the the administrates directly and negotiated a discount by doing so why do you think they will not do the same here ?

    Posted at 8.32 PM UK time....showing as 7.31 PM.
    Last edited by manorhouse; 18-09-2019 at 7:33 PM.
    • masonic
    • By masonic 18th Sep 19, 7:49 PM
    • 12,362 Posts
    • 9,955 Thanks
    masonic
    My claim is the to recover the compensation awarded by the ombudsman against SVS, wrote to LC, they told me my claim is nothing to do with them and I have to take up with FSCS, I have written to FSCS twice and no response. Then I am told that anything relate to SVS will be consider until LC finish their work.
    So I am stuck, any suggestions
    Originally posted by englishmas
    I second bowlhead's suggestion to go back to the FOS and let them know SVS has failed to pay the compensation and is now in administration, and that the administrators have stated they will not consider the decision. They may be able to facilitate your claim to the FSCS or at least advise you of what to do next. But the maximum you'll get from the FSCS is 85k, so you really need your claim to be lodged as a creditor of SVS so that if there are any remaining assets in the business that can be used to repay unsecured creditors, you will get a share.
    Last edited by masonic; 18-09-2019 at 7:55 PM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,302Posts Today

8,697Users online

Martin's Twitter