
CFA fined for anti-fraud control failure
LOSSES & LAWSUITS
In late March, the regulator announced that it was fining Capita Financial Administrators, a third party administrator of collective investment schemes, £300,000 for poor anti-fraud controls over client identities and accounts.
According to the FSA, the fraud appears to have been facilitated by colluding CFA staff. The initial frauds were not discovered by CFA but instead were brought to the firm's attention by clients.
"With fraud becoming an increasing menace, firms must fully understand the risks they face and have robust anti-fraud controls in place," said Philip Robinson, Financial Crime Sector leader.
CFA is a third party administrator that is responsible for carrying out client instructions to buy and sell investments. In August 2004, CFA discovered that a client's name and address had been changed and the sale of units was being processed without instructions from the client.
The firm then found that the data for five other clients had been subject to unauthorised changes. Fraudulent requests for payments totalling £1,134,938 had been made but were stopped from going ahead by CFA.
Further payments and attempted payments were uncovered upon further investigation.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Regulators’ remorse: SVB and the case for IRRBB capital charges
Basel Committee chair among those who say Pillar 1 capital requirement could have helped control SVB risks
Basel’s IRRBB shock scenario update hit by US crisis
Recalibration of shocks had been touted for Q3, but wider rethink may now cause delay
HKMA launches consultation on green taxonomy
Regulator could use proposal to assess progress of banks towards climate goals
After SVB downfall, EBA stress test seeks out unrealised losses
European regulator asks for data on the fair value and sensitivity of bonds and their hedges
EU banks fear Brexit battle over FRTB internal models
Bank of England approach looks easier, but that may not make much difference to model uptake
Europe’s new IRRBB test: the riddle with no answer
A proposed compromise on net interest income test is not scientific, but exact calibration may be impossible
Eurex clearing chief calls for active account carve-outs
Isda AGM: Müller says EU clearing thresholds should exempt market-making and US client trades
The regulator that troubleshoots first, asks questions later
Canada’s bank watchdog aims to intervene early to tackle burgeoning risks, even at the expense of “perfect” regulatory decisions