Retired IFA suing FSA for harassment
Share
A retired IFA is suing the FSA for harassment after a 10-year battle with regulatory bodies which has seen the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) reprimanded for bullying and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) reproached for soliciting complaints.
John Calland
John Calland, who retired as principal of Calland Insurance and Mortgage Services (CIMS) in December 1997 and is now 72, sold the firm to his son in 1997, who went bankrupt in March 2000.
In April 2001, the FSCS started making requests for details of his financial assets and liabilities off the back of preliminary loss assessments, without any investigation of the advice given.
When Calland did not supply the details after repeated requests from the FSCS, which continued until late 2004, it threatened him with possible imprisonment and a fine.
An email from the FSA to the FSCS in October 2002, obtained through a freedom of information request, shows the FSA knew it could not force disclosure.
It says: “The circumstances surrounding Calland do not justify an investigation into his resources (as Calland has not actually done anything ’wrong’).”
However, in December 2002, and again in February and April 2003, the FSA contacted all 287 former CIMS pension clients saying they might be eligible for compensation and asked them to complete a questionnaire.
“I want revealed what incredible and intractable prejudice I have come up against”
John Calland
When Calland refused to disclose his finances to the FSA, it passed its files to the FOS, which sent partly completed complaint forms to a number of Calland’s former pension clients. The FOS progressed four cases against Calland, even though no clients complained to him.
In June 2006, Richard Irwin, the FSCS independent investigator, found the FSCS’s behaviour amounted to “bullying”.
In December 2006, Michael Barnes, the FOS independent assessor, concluded that the FOS solicited the four pension complaints, however, the FOS has continued to progress them.
Calland says: “I want the FSA and its agents to be held accountable for 10 years of harassment but more than anything I want revealed what incredible and intractable prejudice I have come up against from the regulatory agencies.” He is being represented by Hugh Tomlinson, QC. The FSA has submitted a one-off application for a strike-out, which will be heard at Exeter county court on September 26.
The FSA, FSCS and FOS declined to comment.
To receive more relevant articles like this one, why not sign up to our briefings and breaking alerts by clicking here and Follow @fundweb
Readers' comments (6)
Anonymous | 11 Aug 2011 11:24 am
Well done John!!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11 Aug 2011 11:48 am
I wish him well.
The current regulators are a disgrace and hide behind every legal loophole they can find. I hope he wins because it might be a win for all IFA's and the injustice we have suffered under this joke of a quango.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11 Aug 2011 12:01 pm
Well done John, its about time the people abusing their positions are brought to book, the FSA have done as much to destroy people's careers and livelihoods in the financial services industry as the rioters are doing to our major cities; unfortunately the government is providing protection to the FSA insted of finding a way to police there activities.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Bob | 11 Aug 2011 12:07 pm
Hope it goes well John
The FSA are no better than the rioters
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Justin Thomas | 11 Aug 2011 3:03 pm
Let's not forget who gave all this un accountable power to the regulators.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11 Aug 2011 3:31 pm
It is a fundamental point of democratic law, and indeed Human Rights, that if a complaint or allegation is made against someone then they have the right to have that matter put into writing. How do the FSA get away with accepting verbal complaints with no written support, and when that complaint is made to a third party admitting what is "Hearsay" evidence? That is unlawful. Who is resonsible for bringing the FSA to Book?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment