by Gillian Megaughin, Senior Consultant. This article was first published in BBA Newsletter issue 122 February 2012
Section 166 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 is probably the most well known section of the Act and it’s the section that you are most likely to experience in the coming years. There has already been a major increase in its use. The FSA invoked it 16 times in 2006-07, 88 times in 2009-10 and doubled this figure in 2010-11.
For those uninitiated in the world of skilled person reports from section 166 FSMA, the provision requires a firm to engage a third party to carry out a piece of work as scoped and requested by the FSA. The FSA will either appoint or approve the third party, but the costs will be borne by the firm. At the end of the process the skilled person will produce a report including the requisite findings and recommendations.
There are many ‘tools’ within the supervisory and enforcement toolkit, so why is this one so popular? How can firms ensure the best possible outcome if faced with the prospect of a section 166?
In general, skilled persons will be used when the regulator is unclear or uncomfortable with something it has discovered, or after a concern has been raised by a firm. This provision can also be used when the FSA leaves meetings with your firm’s senior management unconvinced by apparent regulatory rigour. Or the regulator may simply require an independent view of an issue, but lacks the resource or expertise to conduct the work itself.
Doctor doctor
The FSA is using its statutory powers to make home visits to firms to ensure the health of the industry, because as we know firms, like bodies, get into trouble from time to time. Hopefully, careful monitoring will allow for early identification of symptoms, but some go undetected and issues materialise. If a problem arises, firms should cooperate to ensure the best possible outcome.
A positive outcome at this early stage might mean that the regulator decides a formal skilled person need not be appointed i.e. the FSA might be satisfied with a ‘shadow section 166’. This is where the firm is asked to carry out the work itself without the need to formally engage a third party or for the FSA to produce a formal requirement notice. This will impress the FSA and decrease the risk of a regulator-appointed skilled person, where costs can be unpredictable. Getting an independent third party to verify your findings and evidence at this stage may well mean you are able to put the regulator’s mind at rest, and you can return to work with a clean record.
Continue Reading »