InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
UK SFO Revises Guidance on Self-Reporting
On October 9, the United Kingdom Serious Fraud Office (SFO) issued policy statements and frequently-asked-questions (FAQs) with regard to: (1) facilitation payments, (2) hospitality and gifts, and (3) self-reporting. While the bulk of the guidance reasserts existing policies, the SFO did revise its guidance on self-reporting. The new guidance makes clear SFO’s position that self-reporting will not always shield a company from prosecution. The fact that a corporate body has reported itself will be a relevant consideration if it forms part of a "genuinely proactive approach adopted by the corporate management team when the offending is brought to their notice.” A decision by the SFO to prosecute will be based on the Full Code Test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, the joint prosecution Guidance on Corporate Prosecutions and, where relevant, the Joint Prosecution Guidance of the Director of the SFO and the Director of Public Prosecutions on the Bribery Act 2010. As explained in the FAQs, the revised statement of policy is not limited to allegations involving overseas bribery and corruption, and if the requirements of the Full Code Test are not established, the SFO may consider civil recovery as an alternative to a prosecution.
Joint Forum Finalizes Guidelines on Supervision of Financial Conglomerates
On September 24, the Joint Forum, which brings together the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the International Organization of Securities Commissions, and the International Association of Insurance Supervisors to coordinate regulation of financial conglomerates, published final principles for the supervision of financial conglomerates. The principles are meant to provide an overarching policy framework to support consistent and effective supervision of financial conglomerates across borders, while closing regulatory gaps. The final guidelines, which update a framework originally adopted in 1999, are organized in five categories—(i) supervisory powers and authority, (ii) supervisory responsibility, (iii) corporate governance, (iv) capital adequacy and liquidity, and (v) risk management—and provide implementation criteria and comments explaining each principle.
UK Court Holds Contract May Be Formed Through Series of Emails
On September 3, an appeals court in the United Kingdom held that a contract of guarantee executed in a series of emails duly authenticated by the electronic signature of the guarantor is enforceable. Golden Ocean Group Ltd. v. Salgaocar Mining Indus. PVT Ltd., No A3/2001/0440, 0438. In this case, a ship owner sought to enter into a long-term charter of the ship with a mining conglomerate. The shipping brokers negotiating the contract on behalf of the parties did so through a series of emails. An early email contained the provision of guarantee, but the guarantee was not explicitly restated in the final email that culminated the agreement. The court held that under English law the emails at issue here properly formed a contract, including the guarantee. The court added that the electronic signature of the guarantor’s agent on the culminating email is proper authentication of the contract of guarantee contained in the earlier email, and that generally, “an electronic signature is sufficient and that a first name, initials, or perhaps a nickname will suffice.” The court upheld the lower court’s decision and dismissed the appeal.
UK's FSA Publishes Consultation Paper on Regulatory Reform Implementation
On September 12, in advance of expected legislation that will restructure the United Kingdom's financial services regulatory framework, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) published the first in a series of Consultation Papers meant to support implementation of the reforms. The Parliament is expected to finalize later this year the Financial Services Bill that will abolish the FSA, create the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to regulate financial service provider conduct in retail and wholesale markets, and shift safety and soundness regulation to the new Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), among other changes. The first Consultation Paper outlines changes to split the existing FSA handbook into new rulebooks for the FCA and PRA. All regulated firms are encouraged to review the Consultation Paper, and the FSA has asked for comments to be submitted by December 12, 2012.
How to Handle a Government Investigation: 13 Things You Should You Do Immediately If the Government Comes Knocking
Actions you take, or don’t take, in the early hours of a government investigation can have costly and far-reaching consequences for a company. At the root of this is the importance of having a plan in place should your company come under investigation, as the last thing you want to be is caught flat-footed. Do your key employees and legal department staff know what to do immediately if the government initiates an investigation?
Below, BuckleySandler’s Government Enforcement and White Collar attorneys identify 13 steps a company and its employees should take immediately when it becomes aware of a government investigation.
- Inform your in-house counsel. Establish a protocol to ensure that counsel is contacted immediately.
- Preserve documents. Inform all necessary employees of the need to retain documents, including electronic documents, with a document hold memo that replaces standard document retention policies for potentially responsive materials.
- Establish early dialogue with the investigating agency. Communication is critical to understanding the scope of the investigation and to establishing a working relationship with the government.
- Assume a parallel investigation will be initiated. Questions about self-reporting, production, and other strategic decisions should be made under the assumption that a parallel criminal or civil suit will follow.
- Alert the Board of Directors and/or Audit Committee. Schedule a meeting with key executives to carefully review the situation and discuss possible remedies and corrective actions. Be mindful that meeting minutes, notes, or emails may be discoverable.
- Consider implementing internal restrictions on the trading of company stock. Be sure all rules regarding insider trading are upheld.
- Evaluate disclosure issues and formulate a plan to address. With the commencement of a government investigation, a number of governance issues will arise. Carefully consider any and all disclosures that may be necessary and take appropriate action.
- Put your insurance carrier on notice. Put your insurer on notice early to increase your chances of having insurance pay for some or all of the investigation and/or litigation costs.
- Determine if actions are needed with respect to employees who are possible wrongdoers. This may involve implementing restrictions or additional oversight of their activities or even dismissal. All issues involving employees need to be carefully considered from a variety of angles, including employment laws, anti-retaliation provisions, and possible future civil litigation.
- Identify remedial measures if needed. It may be necessary to conduct a gap analysis of existing compliance programs and make changes to avoid a future recurrence.
- Prepare for any anticipated media coverage. Any and all public statements will be carefully scrutinized by the media, the public-at-large, and the investigating agency. Therefore, it is critical that sufficient care and attention is given to any public comments by the company or its spokespeople.
- Notify employees of possible contact by the investigating agency and advise them of their rights and obligations. It is important to remind employees of their responsibility to be truthful when speaking with agents of the government, but that they may choose to have an attorney present if they do decide to be interviewed. You should also reiterate your company’s policy on cooperating with investigations and request that employees inform the legal department of any discussions or contacts with the government.
- Commence an internal investigation if necessary. An internal investigation can help your company determine whether the allegations have merit or not, and if they do, the cause and extent and possible corrective actions.
You may also be interested in reading our related blog post on How to Respond to a Subpoena: 10 Things You Should Do Immediately.
European Bank Resolution Proposal Released
On June 6, the European Commission released a proposal to establish common rules for EU member country banking regulators to follow when faced with failing banks. The rules are meant to provide a more standard regulatory structure and approach to help reduce the impact of bank failures, improve market stability, and limit taxpayer risk. To achieve these goals, the Commissions proposal would allow banks that do not pose a systemic risk to fail. Further, the proposal would shift the burden of restructuring costs for a systemically important troubled bank to its shareholders, creditors, and any employees responsible for mismanagement. Public authorities would be given new powers to (i) intervene earlier, (ii) establish in advance bank resolution plans, (iii) assume control of a failing bank if early intervention fails, and (iv) better coordinate cross-border issues raised by a failing bank. Banks, for their part, would be required to put in to place recovery plans and take certain actions if capital reserves fall below a set level, among other things. The proposals must first be considered and approved by the European Parliament and Council, and would take effect in 2018.
European Commission Proposes Electronic Identification Regulation
On June 4, the European Commission adopted a proposed regulation that would create a framework for secure cross-border electronic transactions in Europe. The regulation seeks to facilitate European electronic commerce by requiring mutual recognition of national electronic identification systems, which would allow individuals and businesses to use their national electronic identification schemes to access public services in other EU countries. For example, the regulation would remove technical and legal barriers in order to make it easier for a company in one country to bid on public sector contracts elsewhere within the EU. The regulation does not require action by member states to develop electronic identity cards and will not require an EU-wide electronic identification or database. Under the European Unions ordinary legislative procedure, the regulation now must be adopted by the European Parliament and Council.
UK Upper Tribunal Finds Bank Executive's Compliance Actions Reasonable, Overturns FSA Decision
Recently, the United Kingdoms Upper Tribunal overturned a decision of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) that held a top bank executive liable for failure to take reasonable steps to adequately address certain regulatory compliance problems. Specifically, the FSA charged that the executive failed to take reasonable steps to identify and remediate serious flaws in the design and operational effectiveness of the firms governance and risk management frameworks and was too slow to initiate a comprehensive review of systems and controls across the business, which should have been conducted when he was appointed to lead the firm. The executive challenged the FSA penalty, arguing that his actions to investigate every specific compliance issue that arose and remedy problems in accordance with a defined plan were sufficient and reasonable and that he had undertaken efforts to strengthen his companys compliance monitoring team. The Upper Tribunal agreed, holding that the FSAs expectation that the executive institute a broad overhaul at an earlier date was beyond the bounds of reasonableness. The Upper Tribunal also noted that the majority of the compliance failures originated in one division, that the firm was addressing those issues, and that no one within that or other departments of the firm, nor anyone from the FSA, had ever suggested to the executive a need for a more comprehensive review. The Upper Tribunal directed the FSA to take no action against the executive.
Financial Stability Board Enhances Compensation Practices Monitoring
On April 30, the Financial Stability Board established a new group of national experts from member jurisdictions to monitor and report to the FSB on implementation of the Principles and Standards on Sound Compensation Practices adopted by the FSB in 2009. The FSB also announced a new mechanism for member jurisdictions to bilaterally report, verify, and address specific compensation-related complaints by financial institutions.
Financial Stability Board Publishes Mortgage Underwriting Principles
On April 18, the Financial Stability Board (FSB), an international group comprised of representatives from all G-20 member countries and the European Commission, published principles for sound residential mortgage underwriting practices. The principles are intended to provide minimum acceptable standards to achieve: (i) effective verification of income and other financial information; (ii) reasonable debt service coverage; (iii) appropriate loan-to-value ratios; (iv) effective collateral management; and (v) prudent use of mortgage insurance. The FSB did not attempt to set detailed international standards, but rather established a framework to limit the risks posed by mortgage markets to global financial stability. The report also sets out an implementation framework and describes tools that can be used to monitor and supervise implementation.