FCA under fire for belated Neil Woodford disclosure

Unlock the editor’s digest in free

FT editor Raula Khalaf selected his favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The UK’s financial regulator has recorded the steps of the Star Fund director Nil Woodford in his official register, to brand the “inconsistency” and “confusing” approach to the surveillance of customer groups and lawyers.

The Financial Conduct Authority has simply updated its register – which used customers and agencies dealing with controlled entities to test their certificates with controlled entities – why the Financial Times asked against its proposed action Woodford The records were not reflected in recorded 12 months ago.

FCA Woodford has issued a warning notification against And its company Woodford Investment Management for failure to “work with proper skills, care and perseverance” in February last year in 2019 in 2019 in 2019, for failure to fail to work with about 300,000 investors in nursing.

The regulatory Woodford announced the notices in April 2021 after a long -run investigation Was a “defective” Understanding his responsibilities for the fall of his funds. It has not yet issued a final decision on his search, which Woodford lawyers say he will challenge.

Law companies representing Woodford and WIM in a statement last year in a statement that their clients do not agree with the FCA’s search, which they believe that there is an unprecedented and fundamental misconception “.

The FCA’s Financial Services Register has stated till Thursday that no regulatory action has been taken against Woodford.

“Obviously, a warning notice is an integral part of a regulatory step, enforcement and an integral part of the disciplined process,” the co-director of the Financial Inclusion Center, a Think-Tank and former member of the FCA Board. “FCA is inconsistent here. I can’t see any argument against the FCA publication that it has issued a warning notification and explains that it is currently being challenged.”

The FCA handbook states that the watchdog will consider the information to add to his article after giving a warning notification. However, James Deli, head of the Finance Finance of the Consumer Group Fair, says: “If the FCA thinks there is a strong basis for publishing any warning notice, which includes the name of the individual or the business, there is no reason to attach it to their FCA register entry.”

“(Woodford) The case is in the public domain and so it may be a bit confusing that it does not appear in the central register to test knitted foods for controlled persons,” James Tyler, a former FCA official of City Law Peters and Peters.

The FCA added a reference to his alert notice on Woodford’s page after the FTA approached the FT controller on Wednesday, though Woodford was still tagged: “No current FCA or PRA discipline or regulatory action.”

The regulator states that the warning notice is “FCA’s final decision” and mentions that Woodford’s “regulatory decision was the right to represent the regulatory decision committee”, which would decide whether to decide to declare the application. It refuses to comment on the article issued in the article and the updated notice.

Woodford came after FCA’s publication surrounding concern after the regulator Backtracked in its plan Many more companies that investigate under heavy pressure in the city and the government to do “name and shame”.

FCA told FT that his move against Woodford and WIM was “running”. Woodford, meanwhile Monday announced plans Investors launch a service to provide its stockpicing strategy for a fee six years after the fall of his investment empire.

FCA initially refused to comment when FT asked why his warning notification was not released on Woodford’s registry list.

It was later said: “We have expressed publicly about our work at Woodford Equity Income Fund and publish our concern with a warning notice related to Mr. Woodford,” added: “We updated the article to reflect this information.”

Woodford refused to comment.