FCA bans adviser after appeal is dropped

FCA bans adviser after appeal is dropped

The Financial Conduct Authority has banned and fined a financial adviser after he was refused permission to appeal.

Oxfordshire-based Clive Rosier has been fined £10,000 and been banned from performing any significant influence functions.

His firm – Bayliss & Company (Financial Services) Ltd – has also had its permissions cancelled.

The FCA originally took action against Mr Rosier in 2013 and claimed he had failed to act with due skill, care and diligence.

It also claimed he had not paid his Financial Services Compensation Scheme levies.

Mr Rosier took the matter to the Upper Tribunal where a judge found in the FCA’s favour but he then took it to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal denied Mr Rosier permission to appeal against the tribunals decision in March and the FCA has now reimposed the fine and ban.

Among the FCA’s claims when the matter was upheld at the Upper Tribunal was that Mr Rosier did not complete facts finds or maintain sufficient customer records in a number of cases.

It also claimed he did not assess or record customers’ attitude to risk in some cases and, where he did make such records, in some instances they contained insufficient information to allow him to recommend products or it was out of date.

The judge in the case, Timothy Herrington, said at the time: “We have found that in carrying out his functions as a director of Bayliss, as the person responsible for the processes and procedures that Bayliss followed in its dealings with its clients Mr Rosier fell below the standards to be expected of a person performing those functions.

“In our view it would not be appropriate to withdraw Mr Rosier’s approval to act in a significant influence function or to prohibit him from performing such functions if we were satisfied that he had learned lessons from his failures and would not make the same mistakes were he to continue in such a role.

“Regrettably, we are not satisfied that Mr Rosier has demonstrated that he has learned any lessons from the matters which we have considered in this decision.

“He continues to maintain that such breaches that occurred were minor and technical.

“It is not enough for the principal of a firm to say he will rely on a suitably qualified compliance officer.

“The tone and culture of the firm must be set from the top and we are not satisfied that Mr Rosier would set the right tone or that the culture of the firm would change.”