FSA fines Charterhouse £122,500 for portfolio mismanagement
LONDON – Charterhouse Consulting Wealth Management Limited has been fined £122,500 by the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) for carrying out discretionary portfolio management without permission, and for various conduct of business failings.
Charterhouse regularly switched a number of clients between funds, although the firm did not have permission to operate in this way. The FSA investigation found that Charterhouse would often send clients an email before 6.30am proposing the switching of funds and requiring a response by 8.00am. Switches would then take place without any further instruction from the client.
Charterhouse also failed to record sufficient client information to demonstrate the suitability of its advice, failed to ensure transactions were appropriate for its customers' attitude to risk; and failed to communicate with its clients in a clear and fair manner that was not misleading.
In handing down the fine, the FSA took into account mitigating steps taken by Charterhouse to improve its business activities, including the cessation of business activities falling outside its permitted remit. As a result of agreeing to settle at the earliest opportunity, Charterhouse received the maximum 30% discount afforded under the FSA's Discount Scheme. The fine would otherwise have been £175,000.
"It is unacceptable for a firm to operate in effect as a discretionary portfolio manager without appropriate FSA authorisation. The switching of clients between funds in a way that was outside their declared attitude to risk could have resulted in their suffering large and unexpected financial losses," said Jonathan Phelan, head of retail enforcement at the FSA.
"The disciplinary action we have taken sends out the clear message that firms wishing to offer wealth management services must ensure they operate in a compliant way, which includes ensuring they have the appropriate regulatory permissions for their business activities," Phelan added.
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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
BoE’s Ramsden defends UK’s ring-fencing regime
Deputy governor also says regulatory reform is coming to the UK gilt repo market
Credit spread risk: the cryptic peril on bank balance sheets
Some bankers fear EU regulatory push on CSRBB has done little to improve risk management
Credit spread risk approach differs among EU banks, survey finds
KPMG survey of more than 90 banks reveals disagreement on how to treat liabilities and loans
Bowman’s Fed may limp on by after cuts
New vice-chair seeks efficiency, but staff clear-out could hamper functions, say former regulators
Review of 2025: It’s the end of the world, and it feels fine
Markets proved resilient as Trump redefined US policies – but questions are piling up about 2026 and beyond
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance