Warning to ´Contracts for Differences´ firms on regulatory compliance

CC
CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang

Contributor

CMS is a Future Facing firm with 79 offices in over 40 countries and more than 5,000 lawyers globally. Combining local market insight with a global perspective, CMS provides business-focused advice to help clients navigate change confidently. The firm's expertise and innovative approach anticipate challenges and develop solutions. CMS is committed to diversity, inclusivity, and corporate social responsibility, fostering a supportive culture. The firm addresses key client concerns like efficiency and regulatory challenges through services like Law-Now, offering real-time eAlerts, mobile access, an extensive legal archive, specialist zones, and global events.

On 18 May 2005, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) published a warning to firms that are involved in the trading of equity based Contracts for Differences (CFDs).
United Kingdom Corporate/Commercial Law

On 18 May 2005, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) published a warning to firms that are involved in the trading of equity based Contracts for Differences (CFDs). A CFD is a contract whereby a customer will either pay or receive money when the contract is closed out, with reference to the movement of the price in the underlying equity, which is identified as the basis of the CFD contract, from the date the CFD is opened to the date of close out. A CFD effectively allows the customer to be exposed to price fluctuations in the underlying equity without actually holding the underlying equity.

The FSA's warning to such firms was published in the form of a letter from its head of Retail Intelligence and Regulatory Department to compliance officers. The letter was the result of visits made by the FSA to several firms involved in the trading of CFDs and serves as a warning to other firms also involved in this market.

The letter highlighted that, on an number of instances, the firms involved had reclassified customers as "intermediate customers" under the FSA's Conduct of Business Rules (COB) despite there being insufficient evidence to support the reclassification.

According to COB, a reclassification from a "private customer" to an "intermediate customer" can only be effected if:

  1. the firm has taken reasonable care to determine that the client has sufficient experience and understanding to be classified as an intermediate customer;
  2. the firm has given a written warning to the client of the protections it will lose as a result of reclassification;
  3. the firm has given the client sufficient time to consider these implications; and
  4. the firm has obtained the client’s written consent or is able to demonstrate informed consent was given.

The FSA places particular importance on reclassification as those customers that are re-classified lose the protection of the Financial Ombudsman Service and Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

It is clear from the FSA's strongly worded letter that firms should not reclassify customers unless the strict requirements in COB have been adhered to and that compliance procedures must be followed. The FSA has indicated that enforcement action will be taken against firms that ignore this warning.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 20/06/2005.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More