
Tribunal upholds debarment over ‘ghost quotes’
The FST found that repeated creation of phantom quotes and unauthorised ITC checks breached honesty and integrity standards.

The FST found that repeated creation of phantom quotes and unauthorised ITC checks breached honesty and integrity standards.

Polygraph testing alone cannot establish dishonest conduct; where the circumstantial evidence is weak or contradictory, debarment is a disproportionate sanction.

In exchange for their admissions, they sought to substitute their debarments with an undertaking to repay R470m in client losses.

Despite claims of verbal consent from her client, the FST found the adviser’s informal arrangements did not satisfy the requirements for written, explicit authorisation.

The Tribunal agrees with the FSCA that the entity’s key individual did not ‘come clean’ about her past misconduct.

The FSP’s allegations that the representative violated the terms of the settlement and service agreements did constitute a material breach of the FAIS Act.

Mareo-John Nel breached the FAIS Act after signing an enforceable undertaking to remedy the same unlawful conduct he committed previously.

Section 14(1)(b) of the FAIS Act cannot be stretched to catch misconduct discovered after a representative’s tenure.

Unlike FSCA-imposed bans with fixed terms, debarments driven by an FSP stay in force until another FSP is convinced a rep is Fit and Proper.

The Tribunal confirmed Standard Bank’s decision to debar its representative for borrowing thousands of rands from his clients and failing to disclose his outside business activities.

The FSCA’s investigation also found that Petrus Rasmus Erasmus provided trading signals without a licence.

The Tribunal says individuals who are subject to administrative action are entitled to fair processes that include the speedy finalisation of their matter

The FSP used an email address it obtained from a credit bureau, but the rep denied this address belonged to her.

The Financial Services Tribunal dismisses a reconsideration application by a former representative who claimed a client e-signed documents in person.

The agent repeatedly deviated from the approved product script. Previous warnings and documented missteps played a key role in the decision.

The case highlights that debarment is reserved for instances of clear, intentional breaches of integrity, not mere negligence.

FSPs must ensure their representatives operate strictly within their authorised product categories and according to the client’s mandate.