Interdependence Limited fined 125,000 for inadequate supervision

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined Interdependence Limited 125,000 for serious failings in the supervision of 'appointed representatives' who were advising customers to withdraw cash early from their pensions. The ineffectiveness of the firm's systems and controls led to the risk that several hundred customers may have been mis-sold these contracts.

Interdependence Limited is currently undertaking a past business review of a sample of 65 pension cases to identify whether or not customers may have been disadvantaged between January 1996 and March 2002. This review is scheduled to be concluded by 30 June 2004. A decision will then be made as to whether an extended past business review should be conducted into additional pension sales during this period. If mis-selling is identified then arrangements will be put in place to pay compensation where appropriate.

David Kenmir, Retail Intermediaries Sector Leader at the FSA, said:

"These findings are particularly serious as they affect the pension assets of vulnerable customers approaching retirement.

"Firms must ensure that their recommendations to clients are suitable and they should build this principle into their monitoring of advisers. We will continue to keep a close eye on how appointed representatives are monitored."

The firm failed to:

• Adequately monitor and control its appointed representatives

  Interdependence Limited has to make sure that it adequately monitors all its appointed representatives and it takes responsibility for their actions and communications.

  In 1996 the firm set up a pre-approval system to monitor cases where customers were releasing cash from their pensions. It was intended that pensions specialists from the firm would review all aspects of each proposed transaction to make sure that the sale was suitable for the customer. This system did not, however, work properly or effectively.

  For example, although appointed representatives were required to send all of their pension fund withdrawal cases to the firm for pre-approval, there was no process for ensuring that appointed representatives actually did submit their cases or any way of recording those cases that were not submitted.

  In 90% of all the cases submitted between March 1999 and March 2002 there is no evidence of transactions which should have been submitted for pre-approval actually being submitted.

  Additionally, in several of the cases where records show cases were submitted for pre-approval but then rejected by Interdependence Ltd because the transaction was unsuitable, the appointed representative concerned ignored the decision and was able to go ahead with the sale.

• Keep appropriate records

  The firm failed to keep records that showed that the firm and its appointed representatives had complied with regulatory requirements in relation to its pensions fund withdrawal business.

  For example, prior to March 2002 there were no records to show that the majority of these transactions, that required pre-approval, had been reviewed prior to the business being processed."

Notes for editors

1. "Early vesting is the process through which someone over the age of 50 can release their pension benefits from an occupational or personal pension before they have reached their retirement age. The benefits are transferred to a new pension arrangement from which they can release their money.

2. The contracts involved in this case are known as 'pension fund withdrawal' contracts and are a form of early vesting product. These were introduced by the Finance Act 1995 and involve the option to defer annuity purchase, an ability to vary the level and timing of the income (within certain specified limits) and the ability to pass the fund to a spouse or dependent on the customer's death (provided the customer dies before the age of 75).

3. An 'appointed representative' is appointed (in accordance with section 39 of the Act) a person (other than an representative authorised person) who:

   (a) is a party to a contract with an authorised person (his principal) which: (i) permits or requires him to carry on business of a description prescribed in the Appointed Representatives Regulations; and (ii) complies with such requirements as are prescribed in those Regulations; and (b) is someone for whose activities in carrying on the whole or part of that business his principal has accepted responsibility in writing; and who is therefore an exempt person in relation to any regulated activity comprised in the carrying on of that business for which his principal has accepted responsibility.

4. Interdependence is an intermediary which operates a network of IFAs, all of whom are its Appointed Representatives. On its incorporation in October 1991 Interdependence became a member of the Financial Intermediaries, Managers and Brokers Regulatory Association. On 7 April 1994, Interdependence became regulated by Personal Investment Authority (PIA) and from 1 December 2001 has been authorised by the FSA.

5. Interdependence was fined 35,000 by PIA for rule breaches in the period from October 1997 and January 1999. Interdependence was also fined 175,000 by PIA in November 1998 for breaches in respect of its Pensions Review during 1997 which included similar control issues in respect of its Appointed Representatives.

6. The full text of the Final Notice issued by the Regulatory Decisions Committee (RDC), which includes the background to the case, further detail on the advertising undertaken, the relevant statutory provisions, regulatory requirements contravened and the factors taken into account by the RDC when setting the level of the fine, can be found here.

7. The RDC is established to ensure that FSA decisions regarding enforcement matters (among others) are taken by a body that is separate from the investigation and prosecution functions of the FSA. While the RDC is accountable to the FSA Board for its policies and procedures, this does not affect its independence in relation to its individual decisions.

8. Financial penalties are not treated as income by the FSA. They are applied for the benefit of authorised persons (or the issuers of securities admitted to the official list) as appropriate, and so given back to the industry in subsequent years.

9. Information to help consumers who may be considering ways of releasing cash from their pension fund in advance of retirement is available on our consumer website.

10. The FSA regulates the financial services industry and has four objectives under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000: maintaining market confidence; promoting public understanding of the financial system; the protection of consumers; and fighting financial crime.

11. The FSA aims to maintain efficient, orderly and clean financial markets and help retail consumers achieve a fair deal.