Haworth final decision v Financial Services Authority [2007] UKFSM FSM045 (28 March 2007)

Haworth final decision v Financial Services Authority [2007] UKFSM FSM045 (28 March 2007)

The applicant's failure to comply with the FOS award, failure to conduct a loss assessment, non-payment of compensation, and lack of engagement with the regulatory process demonstrated a lack of integrity and proper standards, rendering him not fit and proper under Threshold Condition 5 and in breach of Principle 6. The reference was dismissed and authorisation cancelled.

Citation
[2007] UKFSM FSM045
Parties
Applicant: Neil Haworth; Authority: Financial Services Authority
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
28 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Regulatory Tribunal Reference / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Reference dismissed
Legal Topics
Authorisation Cancellation, Fit and Proper Person Test, Threshold Condition 5, Principle 6 (customers' Interests), Financial Ombudsman Service Award Compliance
Financial Regulation Administrative Law Authorisation Cancellation Fit and Proper Person Test Threshold Condition 5 Principle 6 (customers' Interests) Financial Ombudsman Service Award Compliance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Haworth

Applicant

Financial Services Authority

Authority

Procedural Posture

Regulatory Tribunal Reference / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant failed to comply with a binding FOS award
  2. 2 Whether the applicant failed to conduct business with integrity and proper standards
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is a fit and proper person under Threshold Condition 5

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's failure to comply with the FOS award, failure to conduct a loss assessment, non-payment of compensation, and lack of engagement with the regulatory process demonstrated a lack of integrity and proper standards, rendering him not fit and proper under Threshold Condition 5 and in breach of Principle 6. The reference was dismissed and authorisation cancelled.

Court Disposition

Reference dismissed

Orders

  • Authority directed to cancel the applicant’s Part IV permission