Ethics and governance in the European Financial centers

The FSA communicates on sanctions, which demonstrates an actual will of the financial center to ensure proper conduct in business and has a dissuasive effect.

Press releases are detailed and state who was fined, what was the fine for and the amount of the fine. Such communication by the regulation body may not negative for companies that are quoted provided that they implement an appropriate communication to demonstrate they have enhanced their controls.

We may see that the typology of sanctions is very large :

Approving a misleading financial promotion
Attempting to mislead the Japanese regulatory and tax authorities
Breach of listing rules
Breaches of FSA Principles ("skill, care and diligence" and "internal organization")
Breaches of FSA Principles relating to the sale of assets
Breaches of money laundering rules
Breaches of rules in relation to a placing of shares and its dealing with regulators thereafter
Breaches of the listing rules
Breaching FSA Principle 5 and Principle 2
Breaching FSA Principles 2 and 3 by failing to conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence
Breaching the FSA's Statements of principle for Approved Persons.
Client money rule breaches
Committing market abuse by misusing relevant information
Compliance failings
Failing to apply for approval of an employee who held a significant management role at the firm when it first applied for authorisation.
Failing to detect or prevent attempts to mislead the Japanse tax authority when chief executive of Credit Suisse Financial Products
Failing to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of transaction reports
Failure to act with due care, skill and diligence, failed to ensure his firm complied with AML requirements and was knowingly concerned in the actions taken by ISUK.
Failure to report contracts for differences (CFD) transactions
Financial promotions failings
For breaching the FSA 's principles for business
For mis-selling precipice bonds
For running a misleading campaign promoting spread betting
For serious systems and controls failings
Inadequate monitoring and record keeping
Inadequate supervision of 'appointed representatives'
Maladministration of PEPs and ISAs
Market abuse
Market misconduct
Mishandling mortgage and endowment complaints
Misleading advertisements
Misleading financial promotion
Misleading precipice and high income bond promotion
Mis-selling savings plans
Mis-selling with-profits savings policies.
Mortgage endowment mis-selling and other failings
Mortgage endowments failings
Pension review failings
'Pensions unlocking'
Poor anti-fraud controls over client identities and accounts
Precipice and with-profit bonds mis-selling
Programme trade failings
Providing misleading information to the FSA
Record keeping and associated compliance breaches
Regulatory failings
Rule breaches relating to the Secure Growth Portfolio
Serious compliance failings and pensions review failings
Serious systemic flaws in its mortgage endowment complaints handling procedures and for not drawing the problems to the attention of the regulator
Systemic failings in its sales process for pensions unlocking
Systems and controls, risk management and compliance failures
Telesales; not providing customers with key facts documents
Transaction reporting breaches
Unacceptable sales practices and not treating customers fairly
Unsuitable sales of high income bond

The total amount of fines between 2002 and 2006 is £70,968,643.

The number of cases depends on the year :
2006 : 18 (dated 26/09)
2005 : 40
2004 : 32
2003 : 17
2002 : 9

The amount fo the fines starts at £ 1,000 in a situation of market abuse up to £ 17,000,000 in an unprecedented situation of market abuse and breaching the listing rules. The averange is £ 760,000.

The amount is dissuasive.

See the cases