Related provisions for SYSC 3.2.1

41 - 60 of 130 items.

Search Term(s)

Filter by Topics

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

CASS 5.4.1GRP
(1) CASS 5.4 permits a firm, which has adequate resources, systems and controls, to declare a trust on terms which expressly authorise it, in its capacity as trustee, to make advances of credit to the firm'sclients. The client money trust required by CASS 5.4 extends to such debt obligations which will arise if the firm, as trustee, makes credit advances, to enable a client's3premium obligations to be met before the premium is remitted to the firm and similarly if it allows claims
CASS 5.4.4RRP
A firm may not handle client money in accordance with the rules in this section unless each of the following conditions is satisfied:(1) the firm must have and maintain systems and controls which are adequate to ensure that the firm is able to monitor and manage its client money transactions and any credit risk arising from the operation of the trust arrangement and, if in accordance with CASS 5.4.2 R a firm complies with both the rules in CASS 5.3 and CASS 5.4, such systems and
SYSC 4.1.1RRP
3(1) A firm must have robust governance arrangements, which include a clear organisational structure with well defined, transparent and consistent lines of responsibility, effective processes to identify, manage, monitor and report the risks it is or might be exposed to, and internal control mechanisms, including sound administrative and accounting procedures and effective control and safeguard arrangements for information processing systems.8(2) [deleted]1313[Note: article 74
SYSC 4.1.10RRP
A 21management company10 must monitor and, on a regular basis, evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of its systems, internal control mechanisms and arrangements established in accordance with SYSC 4.1.4 R to SYSC 4.1.9 R and take appropriate measures to address any deficiencies.[Note: 21article 4(5) of the UCITS implementing Directive]10
SYSC 4.1.11GRP
Depending on the nature, scale and complexity of its business, it may be appropriate for a firm to form an audit committee. An audit committee could typically examine management's process for ensuring the appropriateness and effectiveness of systems and controls, examine the arrangements made by management to ensure compliance with requirements and standards under the regulatory system, oversee the functioning of the internal audit function (if applicable) and provide an interface
BIPRU 7.10.8GRP
BIPRU 7.10 sets out the minimum standards that the appropriate regulator expects firms to meet before granting a VaR model permission. The appropriate regulator will not grant a VaR model permission unless it is satisfied that the requirements of BIPRU 7.10 are met and it is satisfied about the procedures in place at a firm to calculate the model PRR. In particular the appropriate regulator will not normally grant a VaR model permission unless it is satisfied about the quality
BIPRU 7.10.13GRP
As part of the process for dealing with an application for a VaR model permission the following may be reviewed: organisational structure and personnel; details of the firm's market position in the relevant products; revenue and risk information; valuation and reserving policies; operational controls; information technology systems; model release and control procedures; risk management and control framework; risk appetite and limit structure; future developments relevant to model
BIPRU 7.10.81GRP
In assessing whether the VaR model is implemented with integrity as described in BIPRU 7.10.58R (Stress testing), the appropriate regulator will consider in particular the information technology systems used to run the model and associated calculations. The assessment may include:(1) feeder systems; risk aggregation systems; time series databases; the VaR model system; stress testing system; the backtesting system including profit and loss cleaning systems where appropriate; data
SUP 15.3.18GRP
In determining whether a matter is significant, a firm should have regard to:(1) the size of any monetary loss or potential monetary loss to itself or its customers (either in terms of a single incident or group of similar or related incidents);(2) the risk of reputational loss to the firm; and(3) whether the incident or a pattern of incidents reflects weaknesses in the firm's internal controls.
SUP 15.3.20GRP
In addition, the firm may have suffered significant financial losses as a result of the incident, or may suffer reputational loss, and the FCA11 will wish to consider this and whether the incident suggests weaknesses in the firm'sinternal controls.3535
SUP 15.3.34GRP
21In determining whether a matter is significant, a firm should have regard to the actual or potential effect on competition, any customer detriment, and the duration of any infringement and implications for the firm's systems and controls.
EG 2.11.1RP
2The FCA is committed to ensuring that senior managers of firms fulfil their responsibilities. The FCA expects senior management to take responsibility for ensuring firms identify risks, develop appropriate systems and controls to manage those risks, and ensure that the systems and controls are effective in practice.1 Where senior managers have failed to meet our standards1, the FCA will, where appropriate, bring cases against individuals as well as, or instead of,1firms. The
SYSC 13.4.1GRP
Under Principle 11 and SUP 15.3.1 R, a firm must notify the FCA1 immediately of any operational risk matter of which the FCA1 would reasonably expect notice. SUP 15.3.8 G provides guidance on the occurrences that this requirement covers, which include a significant failure in systems and controls and a significant operational loss.
SYSC 13.10.1GRP
Whilst a firm may take out insurance with the aim of reducing the monetary impact of operational risk events, non-monetary impacts may remain (including impact on the firm's reputation). A firm should not assume that insurance alone can replace robust systems and controls.
SUP 3.7.2GRP
A firm should consider whether it should notify the FCA and the PRA (if it is a PRA-authorisedfirm) or the FCA (in all other cases) under Principle 11 if:(1) the firm expects or knows its auditor will qualify his report on the audited annual financial statements or add an explanatory paragraph; or (2) the firm receives a written communication from its auditor commenting on internal controls (see also SUP 15.3).
IFPRU 11.4.4RRP
A firm or qualifying parent undertaking must notify the FCA without delay of a change to any of the following which could have materially affect the information in IFPRU 11 Annex 2R (Resolution plan information):(1) its legal or organisational structure; (2) its business; or(3) its financial situation.[Note: article 10(6) second paragraph of RRD]
EG 2.12.1RP
1An important consideration before an enforcement investigation and/or enforcement action is taken forward is the nature of a firm’s overall relationship with the FCA and whether, against that background, the use of enforcement tools is likely to further the FCA's aims and objectives. So, for any similar set of facts, using enforcement tools will be less likely if a firm has built up over time a strong track record of taking its senior management responsibilities seriously and
MAR 5.6.1RRP
1A firm2 must:(1) report to the FCA any2: (a) significant breaches of the firm's rules;(b) disorderly trading conditions;2(c) conduct that may involve market abuse; and2(d) system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument;2(2) supply the information required under this rule without delay to the FCA and any other authority competent for the investigation and prosecution of market abuse; and2(3) provide full assistance to the FCA, and any other authority competent for the
IFPRU 1.3.1RRP
Except for operational risk, a firm that is permitted to use internal approaches for the calculation of risk weighted exposure amounts or own fund requirements must report annually to the FCA: (1) the results of the calculations of its internal approaches for its exposures or positions that are included in the benchmark portfolios; and(2) an explanation of the methodologies used to produce those calculations in (1).[Note: article 78(1) of CRD]
REC 2.3.17GRP
4The financial risk assessment should be based on a methodology which provides a reasonable estimate of the potential business losses which a UK RIE might incur in stressed but plausible market conditions. The FCA5 would expect a UK RIE to carry out a financial risk assessment at least once in every twelve-month period, or more frequently if there are material changes in the nature, scale or complexity of the UK RIE's operations or its business plans that suggest such financial
REC 2.3.20GRP
4The FCA5 would expect to consider the relevant annual6 financial risk assessment, any proposal with respect to an operational risk buffer and, if applicable, the consolidated balance sheet, in formulating, in accordance with the usual prudential cycle for UK RIEs,6 its guidance on the amount of eligible financial resources it considers to be sufficient for the UK RIE to hold for6 the recognition requirements. In formulating its guidance, the FCA5 would, where relevant, consider
SYSC 4.8.11GRP
(1) The purpose of SYSC 4.8.10R is to avoid gaps. It is to ensure that an SMF manager has responsibility for every part of a branch’s activities, business areas and management functions not otherwise covered by other parts of this section or by the equivalent PRA requirements.(2) SYSC 4.8.10R(1) refers to the activities, business areas and management functions of the branch that are under the management of the branch’sgoverning body. However, the FCA recognises that for some branches,
SYSC 4.8.20GRP
(1) SYSC 4.8.10R(2) relates to the allocation of local responsibility for any activities, business areas and functions of the branch which are not under the management of the branch’sgoverning body.(2) SYSC 4.8.10R(3) states that a person who has local responsibility under SYSC 4.8.10R(2) must be directly involved in the management of the activity, business area or management function for which they have responsibility under (2).(3) A person having local responsibility for a function
INSPRU 7.1.27GRP
Firms should also consider whether their systems and controls provide sufficient information to permit senior management to identify the crystallisation of risks in a timely manner so as to provide them with the opportunity to respond and allow the firm to obtain the full value of the modelled management action. Firms should also analyse the wider implications of the management actions, particularly where they represent significant divergence from the business plan and use this
INSPRU 7.1.34GRP
Where the firm is relying on systems and controls in order to mitigate risks, the firm should consider the risk of those systems and controls failing at the confidence level at which the ICA is being carried out.
COLL 6.2.9GRP
(1) As the authorised fund manager normally controls the issue, cancellation, sale and redemption of an authorised fund'sunits, it occupies a position that could, without appropriate systems and controls, involve a conflict of interest between itself and its clients.(2) SYSC 3.1.1 R (Systems and controls) requires that a firm take reasonable care to establish and maintain such systems and controls as are appropriate to its business and Principle 8 requires a firm to manage conflicts
COLL 6.2.12GRP

Explanatory table: This table belongs to COLL 6.2.2 G (4) (Purpose).

Correction of box management errors

1

Controls by authorised fund managers

An authorised fund manager needs to be able to demonstrate that it has effective controls over:

(1)

its calculations of what units are owned by it (its 'box'); and

(2)

compliance with COLL 6.2.8 R which is intended to prevent a negative box.

2

Controls by depositaries

(1)

Under COLL 6.6.4 (General duties of the depositary), a depositary should take reasonable care to ensure that a scheme2 is managed in accordance with COLL 6.2 (Dealing) and COLL 6.3 (Pricing and valuation).

(2)

A depositary should therefore make a regular assessment of the authorised fund manager's box management procedures (including supporting systems) and controls. This should include reviewing the authorised fund manager's controls and procedures when the depositary assumes office, on any significant change and on a regular basis, to ensure that a series of otherwise minor changes do not have a cumulative and a significant effect on the accuracy of the controls and procedures.

3

Recording and reporting of box management errors

(1)

An authorised fund manager should record all errors which result in a breach of COLL 6.2.8 R (Controls over the issue and cancellation of units) and as soon as an error is discovered, the authorised fund manager should report the fact to the depositary, together with details of the action taken, or to be taken, to avoid repetition of the error.

(2)

A depositary should report material box management errors to the FCA immediately. Materiality should be determined by taking into account a number of factors including:

  • the implications of the error for the sufficiency of controls put into place by the authorised fund manager;
  • the significance of any breakdown in the authorised fund manager's management controls or other checking procedures;
  • the significance of any failure of systems or back-up arrangements;
  • the duration of an error; and
  • the level of compensation due to the scheme, and an authorised fund manager's ability (or otherwise) to meet claims for compensation in full.

(3)

A depositary should also make a return to the FCA (in the manner prescribed by SUP 16.6.8 R) on a quarterly basis.
SYSC 4.4.5RRP

A firm must appropriately allocate to one or more individuals, in accordance with the following table, the functions of:

  1. (1)

    dealing with the apportionment of responsibilities under SYSC 4.4.3 R; and

  2. (2)

    overseeing the establishment and maintenance of systems and controls under SYSC 4.1.1 R.

    3. 1: Firm type

    2: Allocation of both functions must be to the following individual, if any (see Note):

    3: Allocation to one or more individuals selected from this column is compulsory if there is no allocation to an individual in column 2, but is otherwise optional and additional:

    (1) A firm which is a body corporate and is a member of a group, other than a firm in row (2)

    (1) the firm'schief executive (and all of them jointly, if more than one); or

    the firm's and its group's:

    (1) directors; and

    (2) senior managers

    (2) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of:

    (a) the group; or

    (b) a group division within which some or all of the firm'sregulated activities fall

    (2) An incoming EEA firm or incoming Treaty firm (note: only the functions in SYSC 4.4.5R (2) must be allocated)

    (not applicable)

    the firm's and its group's:

    (1) directors; and

    (2) senior managers

    (3) Any other firm

    the firm'schief executive (and all of them jointly, if more than one)

    the firm's and its group's:

    (1) directors; and

    (2) senior managers

    Note: Column 2 does not require the involvement of the chief executive or other executive director or senior manager in an aspect of corporate governance if that would be contrary to generally accepted principles of good corporate governance.
SYSC 4.4.6GRP

Frequently asked questions about allocation of functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R

Question

Answer

1

Does an individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R need to be an approved person or a certification employee8?

An individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R will be performing the apportionment and oversight function (CF 8, see SUP 10A.7.1 R17) and an application must be made under section 59 of the Act for approval of the individual before the function is performed. There are exceptions from this in SUP 10A.117 (Approved persons - Application).

The apportionment and oversight function does not apply to a relevant authorised person. However, a person performing the role in SYSC 4.4.5R will fall into the certification regime in SYSC 5.2 (Certification Regime), unless the person performing it is an approved person. A person performing the role in SYSC 4.4.5R may be an approved person because of another role that they perform (such as being an executive director).8

1717

2

If the allocation is to more than one individual, can they perform the functions, or aspects of the functions, separately?

If the functions are allocated to joint chief executives under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, they are expected to act jointly. If the functions are allocated to an individual under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, in addition to individuals under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, the former may normally be expected to perform a leading role in relation to the functions that reflects his position. Otherwise, yes.

3

What is meant by "appropriately allocate" in this context?

The allocation of functions should be compatible with delivering compliance with Principle 3, SYSC 4.4.3 R and SYSC 4.1.1 R. The appropriate regulator considers that allocation to one or two individuals is likely to be appropriate for most firms.

4

If a committee of management governs a firm or group, can the functions be allocated to every member of that committee?

Yes, as long as the allocation remains appropriate (see Question 3). If the firm also has an individual as chief executive, then the functions must be allocated to that individual as well under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see Question 7).

5

Does the definition of chief executive include the possessor of equivalent responsibilities with another title, such as a managing director or managing partner?

Yes.

6

Is it possible for a firm to have more than one individual as its chief executive?

Although unusual, some firms may wish the responsibility of a chief executive to be held jointly by more than one individual. In that case, each of them will be a chief executive and the functions must be allocated to all of them under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see also Questions 2 and 7).

7

If a firm has an individual as chief executive, must the functions be allocated to that individual?

Normally, yes, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

But if the firm is a body corporate and a member of a group, the functions may, instead of being allocated to the firm'schief executive, be allocated to a director or senior manager from the group responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division, so long as this is appropriate (see Question 3). Such individuals may nevertheless require approval under section 59 (see Question 1).

If the firm chooses to allocate the functions to a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of a relevant group division, the FSA would expect that individual to be of a seniority equivalent to or greater than a chief executive of the firm for the allocation to be appropriate.

See also Question 14.

8

If a firm has a chief executive, can the functions be allocated to other individuals in addition to the chief executive?

Yes. SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, permits a firm to allocate the functions, additionally, to the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers as long as this is appropriate (see Question 3).

9

What if a firm does not have a chief executive?

Normally, the functions must be allocated to one or more individuals selected from the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3.

But if the firm:

(1) is a body corporate and a member of a group; and

(2) the group has a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division;

then the functions must be allocated to that individual (together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate) under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

10

What do you mean by "group division within which some or all of the firm's regulated activities fall"?

A "division" in this context should be interpreted by reference to geographical operations, product lines or any other method by which the group's business is divided.

If the firm's regulated activities fall within more than one division and the firm does not wish to allocate the functions to its chief executive, the allocation must, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, be to:

(1) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group; or (2) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of one of those divisions;

together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate. (See also Questions 7 and 9.)

11

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an overseas firm which is not an incoming EEA firm, incoming Treaty firm or UCITS qualifier?

The firm must appropriately allocate those functions to one or more individuals, in accordance with SYSC 4.4.5 R, but:

(1) The responsibilities that must be apportioned and the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to activities carried on from a UK establishment with certain exceptions (see

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R). Note that SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.10R does not extend the territorial scope of SYSC 4.4 for an overseas firm.

(2) The chief executive of an overseas firm is the person responsible for the conduct of the firm's business within the United Kingdom (see the definition of "chief executive"). This might, for example, be the manager of the firm'sUK establishment, or it might be the chief executive of the firm as a whole, if he has that responsibility.

The apportionment and oversight function applies to such a firm, unless it falls within a particular exception from the approved persons regime (see Question 1).

12

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an incoming EEA firm or incoming Treaty firm?

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.1R(2) and SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R restrict the application of SYSC 4.4.5 R for such a firm. Accordingly:

(1) Such a firm is not required to allocate the function of dealing with apportionment in SYSC 4.4.5R (1).

(2) Such a firm is required to allocate the function of oversight in SYSC 4.4.5R (2). However, the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to matters which the appropriate regulator, as Host State regulator, is entitled to regulate (there is guidance on this in SUP 13A Annex 2). Those are primarily, but not exclusively, the systems and controls relating to the conduct of the firm's activities carried on from its UK branch.

(3) Such a firm need not allocate the function of oversight to its chief executive; it must allocate it to one or more directors and senior managers of the firm or the firm'sgroup under SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (2).

(4) An incoming EEA firm which has provision only for cross border services is not required to allocate either function if it does not carry on regulated activities in the United Kingdom; for example if they fall within the overseas persons exclusions in article 72 of the Regulated Activities Order.

See also Questions 1 and 15.

13

What about a firm that is a partnership or a limited liability partnership?

The appropriate regulator envisages that most if not all partners or members will be either directors or senior managers, but this will depend on the constitution of the partnership (particularly in the case of a limited partnership) or limited liability partnership. A partnership or limited liability partnership may also have a chief executive (see Question 5). A limited liability partnership is a body corporate and, if a member of a group, will fall within SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (1) or (2).

14

What if generally accepted principles of good corporate governance recommend that the chief executive should not be involved in an aspect of corporate governance?

The Note to SYSC 4.4.5 R provides that the chief executive or other executive director or senior manager need not be involved in such circumstances. For example, the UK Corporate Governance Code5 recommends that the board of a listed company should establish an audit committee of independent,9 non-executive directors to be responsible (among other things) for overseeing the effectiveness9 of the audit process and the objectivity and independence of the external auditor9. That aspect of the oversight function may therefore be allocated to the members of such a committee without involving the chief executive. Such individuals may require approval under section 59 in relation to that function (see Question 1).

5

15

What about incoming electronic commerce activities carried on from an establishment in another EEA State with or for a person in the United Kingdom?

SYSC does not apply to an incoming ECA provider acting as such.
MAR 5.3A.1RRP
1A firm must ensure that the systems and controls, including procedures and arrangements, used in the performance of its activities are adequate, effective and appropriate for the scale and nature of its business.
MAR 5.3A.2RRP
MAR 5.3A.1R applies in particular to systems and controls concerning:(1) the resilience of the firm’s trading systems;(2) its capacity to deal with peak order and message volumes;(3) the ability to ensure orderly trading under conditions of severe market stress;(4) the effectiveness of business continuity arrangements to ensure the continuity of the MTF’s services if there is any failure of its trading systems, including the testing of the MTF’s systems and controls;(5) the ability
IFPRU 11.3.9RRP
If the RRD group includes an IFPRU 730k firm that is not a significant IFPRU firm (and does not include an IFPRU 730k firm that is a significant IFPRU firm) the group recovery plan must include:(1) a summary of the key elements of the group recovery plan;(2) information on the governance of the group, including: (a) how the group recovery plan is integrated into the corporate governance of the group; and (b) the group's overall risk management framework;(3) a description of the
IFPRU 11.3.20RRP
(1) A firm or qualifying parent undertaking must update the group recovery plan at least:(a) annually, if the group: (i) includes an IFPRU 730k firm that is a significant IFPRU firm; or(ii) does not include an IFPRU 730k firm; or(b) once every two years, if the group includes an IFPRU 730k firm that is not a significant IFPRU firm.(2) A firm or qualifying parent undertaking must also update its group recovery plan after a change to any of the following which could materially affect
COND 2.4.2GRP
(1) [deleted]88(2) In this context, the FCA will interpret the term 'appropriate88' as meaning sufficient in terms of quantity, quality and availability, and 'resources' as including all financial resources (though only in the case of firms not carrying on, or seeking to carry on, a PRA-regulated activity)8, non-financial resources and means of managing its resources; for example, capital, provisions against liabilities, holdings of or access to cash and other liquid assets, human
COND 2.4.4GRP
(1) [deleted]88(2) Relevant matters to which the FCA may have regard when assessing whether a firm will satisfy, and continue to satisfy, this threshold condition8may include but are not limited to:(a) (in relation to a firm other than a firm carrying on, or seeking to carry on, a PRA-regulated activity),8 whether there are any indications that the firm may have difficulties if the application is granted, at the time of the grant or in the future, in complying with any of the