Sesame fined £330,000 by FSA for scarps failures
LONDON – The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined Sesame Limited £330,000 for failing to treat its customers fairly by not handling complaints concerning Structured Capital At Risk Products (SCARPs) appropriately.
The problems with Sesame's complaints handling were found as part of the FSA's thematic review of SCARPs during March and August 2004. The FSA discovered that Sesame incorrectly rejected complaints from approximately 350 customers between March 2003 and October 2004, resulting in a loss of £5.9 million for the customers involved. The complaints related to sales made by Sesame's legacy networks.
After the FSA identified the problems, Sesame took action to ensure all affected customers were compensated, and contracted external advisers to review its SCARPs complaint handling procedures and train its staff. If the firm had failed to co-operate or provide adequate commitment to mitigation and remedial action, the penalty would have been substantially higher, the FSA confirmed.
"Sesame has no excuse for complaints handling failures of this kind, not least because the FSA had already issued a number of publications concerning both SCARPs and complaints handling. The failings we found highlight the need for firms to implement and maintain robust complaints handling procedures and to train staff adequately," said William Amos, head of retail enforcement at the FSA.
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
EU states take the slow road to new cross-border services ban
Late national transposition hampers foreign banks’ decisions on location of affected activities
Don’t mention the rules: the fight against prediction market abuse
For the CFTC to regulate new venues effectively, it must first redefine insider trading
Can the US FRTB revamp make the IMA great again?
Banks are finally presented with a viable internal models framework under Basel III’s market risk rules
UK rethinking tougher capital rules for US bank subsidiaries
US endgame draft would trigger UK Basel III trap floor for foreign banks, but PRA is reviewing
EBA proposes drastic overhaul to supervisory data reporting
Revamp will cut back the number of datapoints and integrate overlapping reports
CFTC wants to regulate prediction markets. Is it up to the task?
Former officials echo state gambling authorities’ concerns over agency’s ability to police betting risks
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say