Related provisions for EG 5.2.3

1 - 4 of 4 items.

Search Term(s)

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).

DEPP 5.1.2GRP
A person who is or may be subject to enforcement action may wish to discuss the proposed action with FCA4 staff through settlement discussions.4
DEPP 5.1.3GRP
Settlement discussions may take place at any time during the enforcement process if both parties agree. This might be before the giving of a warning notice, before a decision notice, or even after referral of the matter to the Tribunal. But the FCA4 would not normally agree to detailed settlement discussions until it has a sufficient understanding of the nature and gravity of the suspected misconduct or issue to make a reasonable assessment of the appropriate outcome. Settlement
DEPP 5.1.4GRP
FCA4staff and the person concerned may agree that neither the FCA4 nor the person concerned would seek to rely against the other on any admissions or statements made in the course of their settlement discussions if the matter is considered subsequently by the RDC or the Tribunal.44
DEPP 5.1.5GRP
(1) The settlement decision makers may, but need not, participate in the discussions exploring possible settlement.(2) If the settlement decision makers have not been involved in the discussions, but an agreement has been reached, they may ask to meet the relevant FCA4 staff or the person concerned in order to assist in the consideration of the proposed settlement.4
DEPP 5.1.8GRP
(1) Where the settlement decision makers decline to issue a statutory notice despite the proposed settlement, they may invite FCA4 staff and the person concerned to enter into further discussions to try to achieve an outcome the settlement decision makers would be prepared to endorse.4(2) However, if the proposed action by the FCA4 has been submitted to the RDC for consideration, it will be for the RDC to decide:4(a) whether to extend the period for representations in response
EG 5.2.1RP
1Settlement discussions between FCA staff and the person concerned are possible at any stage of the enforcement process if both parties agree.
EG 5.2.2RP
1The FCA considers that in general, the earlier settlement discussions can take place the better this is likely to be from a public interest perspective. However, the FCA will only engage in such discussions once it has a sufficient understanding of the nature and gravity of the suspected misconduct or issue to make a reasonable assessment of the appropriate outcome. At the other end of the spectrum, the FCA expects that settlement discussions following a decision notice or second
EG 5.5.2RP
2Normally, where the outcome is potentially a financial penalty, the FCA will send a letter at an early point in the enforcement process to the subject of the investigation. This is what the FCA refers to as a stage 1 letter.
EG 5.5.4RP
2There is no set form for a stage 1 letter though it will always explain the nature of the misconduct, the FCA's view on penalty, and the period within which the FCA expects any settlement discussions to be concluded. In some cases, a draft statutory notice setting out the alleged rule breaches and the proposed penalty may form part of the letter, to convey the substance of the case team’s concerns and reasons for arriving at a particular penalty figure.
EG 5.5.6RP
2The FCA considers that 28 days following a stage 1 letter will normally be the ‘reasonable opportunity to reach agreement as to the amount of penalty’ before the expiry of stage 1 contemplated by DEPP 6.7.3. Extensions to this period will be granted in exceptional circumstances only.
EG 5.3.1RP
1As described above, the FCA operates special decision-making arrangements under which members of FCA senior management take decisions on FCA settlements. This means that settlement discussions will take place without involving the RDC. The FCA would expect to hold any settlement discussions on the basis that neither FCA staff nor the person concerned would seek to rely against the other on any admissions or statements made if the matter is considered subsequently by the RDC or