• FSA seeks time-limit changes to reflect enforcement shift
  • But changes arguably surplus to requirements
  • FSA action should be "contemporaneous" and evidence "fresh"

The UK's recently-published Financial Services Bill (http://tinyurl.com/yec7dq4) includes amongst its many aspects a provision which would amend time-limits in respect of actions that the Financial Services Authority can bring against individuals. However, according to an article written by FSI lawyer Alexia Adda the two year extensions (to a total of four years) proposed to extend powers under sections 63 and 64a of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000008_en_1) are possibly unnecessary.

Adda's article elucidates the FSA's reasons for wanting to see the time extensions in place, which include a shift in the focus of the FSA's enforcement action so as to counter "cavalier" and "incompetent" approaches to risk management, noting that "Where previously the FSA would only take enforcement action against senior managers when there existed an element of personal culpability for the misconduct, this has now changed."

She notes also that another aspect of the FSA's stated need for an extension of time limits is "simply due to an increase in the volume of investigations being carried out against individuals." Following Northern Rock and the FSA's subsequent internal review, she notes, "there is now far more intensive supervision than there was previously, particularly across high impact firms,"

But Adda concludes that there are question marks as to whether the proposed extensions are necessary, or indeed fair. She points out that the purpose of the FSA is to regulate and discipline market users for the protection of the consumers, public and economy alike. And that "this supervision and any subsequent action needs to be contemporaneous, not only to guarantee maximum protection to market users in promptly preventing unauthorised and/or unsafe action, but also to ensure that evidence remains fresh, therefore, preserving, as far as possible, a safe and reliable judicial process."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.