Related provisions for CASS 5.5.44
1 - 17 of 17 items.
A firm owes a duty of care to a client when it decides where to place client money. The review required by CASS 5.5.43 R is intended to ensure that the risks inherent in placing client money with a bank are minimised or appropriately diversified by requiring a firm to consider carefully the bank or banks with which it chooses to place client money. For example, a firm which is likely only to hold relatively modest amounts of client money will be likely to be able to satisfy this
If a firm is unable to identify money that it has received as either client money or its own money under CASS 7.13.37 R, it should consider whether it would be appropriate to return the money to the person who sent it or to the source from where it was received (3for example, the banking institution).
(1) A firm should ensure that the amount it reflects in its internal client money reconciliation as its client money resource is equal to the aggregate balance on its client bank accounts. For example, if:(a) a firm holds client money received as cash, cheques or payment orders but not yet deposited in a client bank account (in accordance with CASS 7.13.32 R); and(b) that firm records all receipts from clients, whether or not yet deposited with a bank, in its cashbook (see CASS
The records maintained under this section, including the sub-pool disclosure documents, are a record of the firm that must be kept in a durable medium for at least five years following the date on which client money was last held by the firm for a sub-pool to which those records or the sub-pool disclosure document applied.
The instructions referred to at CASS 8.2.1 R (4) are all instructions given by a firm to another person who also has a relationship with the firm'sclient. For example, the other person may be the client'sbank, intermediary, custodian or credit card provider. This means, for example, that any means by which a firm can control a client's money or assets for which it is itself responsible to the client (rather than any other person) would not amount to a mandate. This includes where
29Examples of rules being interpreted as cut back by GEN 2.2.23 R include the following:(1) [deleted]1212(2) SYSC 6.1.1 R requires a firm to maintain adequate policies and procedures to ensure compliance with its obligations under the regulatory system; SYSC 6.1.1 R should be interpreted:(a) as applied by the FCA in respect of a PRA-authorised person's compliance with regulatory obligations that are the responsibility of the FCA (for example, in respect of a bank maintaining policies