The FCA said that, between 24 February 2010 and 20 December 2012, Mr Palmer failed to take adequate steps to ensure the firms’ appointed representatives and individual advisers gave suitable advice to approximately 40,000 customers.
The FCA imposed a financial penalty on Mr Palmer of £86,691 and banned him from performing any significant influence function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by an authorised person, exempt person, or exempt professional firm.
Mr Palmer disputes the FCA’s view and has referred the matter to the Tribunal.
The tribunal may uphold, vary or cancel the FCA’s decision. In the case of the decision to impose a penalty, the tribunal will determine what (if any) is the appropriate action for the FCA to take. In the case of the decision to impose a prohibition order, the tribunal will determine whether to dismiss the reference or remit it to the FCA with a direction to reconsider and reach a decision in accordance with the findings of the tribunal.
Financial Limited and Investments Limited were acquired by Tavistock Investments, together with their parent company, Standard Financial Group Ltd, on 13 February 2015. Following an application by each of the Firms, their permissions have been cancelled, which took effect from 10 September 2015 for Investments Limited and 15 October 2015 for Financial Limited. The Firms and their parent company are now in liquidation.
In a separate decision the FCA has fined former risk management director at the group, Ms Paivi Katriina Grigg, £14,807 for failing to ensure the network’s risk management framework was adequate to mitigate risks to the group’s customers.
The FCA found that Ms Grigg failed properly to understand and carry out a number of her specific responsibilities. Ms Grigg’s failures resulted in the group operating under a flawed risk management framework which did not adequately identify and mitigate risks to the group’s customers, causing consumer detriment.
Of significant concern to the FCA was that despite Ms Grigg’s awareness that the group’s business model posed an increased risk to customers because it afforded the group’s ARs and CF30s a high degree of flexibility and freedom as to how they could operate within the network, Ms Grigg failed to ensure the increased risks to customers were adequately addressed in the risk management framework. Ms Grigg’s conduct put approximately 26,750 customers at risk of poor outcomes, including the risk of receiving unsuitable advice from the group’s ARs and CF30s.
The action taken against Ms Grigg is final as she has not referred her case to the tribunal.
