Judgment was given earlier this month by the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) in Khan v Financial Conduct Authority: see here (pdf). The Tribunal directed that it was appropriate for the FCA to fine Mr Khan £80,000 for his failure to act with integrity, as required by Principle 1 of the Statements of Principle and Code of Practice for Approved Persons, by submitting a personal mortgage application containing false income details. In doing so, the Tribunal held that a substantial financial penalty was required for reasons of deterrence given the prevalence of mortgage fraud and its potential effect on the stability of the financial system.
Thursday, 24 April 2014
UK: Deterrent effect warrants substantial penalty, Tribunal holds
Judgment was given earlier this month by the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) in Khan v Financial Conduct Authority: see here (pdf). The Tribunal directed that it was appropriate for the FCA to fine Mr Khan £80,000 for his failure to act with integrity, as required by Principle 1 of the Statements of Principle and Code of Practice for Approved Persons, by submitting a personal mortgage application containing false income details. In doing so, the Tribunal held that a substantial financial penalty was required for reasons of deterrence given the prevalence of mortgage fraud and its potential effect on the stability of the financial system.
No comments:
Post a Comment