The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has banned Daniel Hassell from working in regulated financial services. Hassell knew that the FSA was not satisfied that he was a fit and proper person to perform a significant influence function. Despite this Hassell performed a function at a City firm for four years without obtaining the FSA’s approval.
Vantage Capital Markets LLP (Vantage), an interdealer broker, was formed as a limited liability partnership in 2004 and during Hassell’s time at the firm it had three capital partners. Hassell was not a capital partner, but despite a job title of ‘consultant’, exercised a significant influence over Vantage. The majority of the brokerage business was previously owned by Hassell and generated around half of Vantage’s revenues. Hassell received approximately one third of the firm’s profits, the remainder being shared between the capital partners. Hassell was, on occasion, presented as an owner in correspondence and was seen as such by some of the Vantage staff.
FSA rules require those performing significant influence functions to be approved persons. At the time of its authorisation Vantage applied for Hassell to be an approved person as partner of Vantage. However Hassell was the subject of an FSA investigation. The FSA informed Vantage of its concerns about Hassell and Vantage withdrew the application.
In February 2007, the FSA told Hassell that he was no longer being investigated. Vantage applied again for approval for Hassell, but withdrew the application after the FSA indicated to Vantage and Hassell that it would not approve Hassell to perform a significant influence function due to issues arising from the investigation. Despite this Hassell continued to exercise a significant influence over the firm until an FSA supervisory visit in 2009. He did not take steps to limit the remit of his role and influence at Vantage. The effect was that he was able to exercise a significant influence over the activities of Vantage without any oversight by the FSA.
Margaret Cole, managing director of enforcement and financial crime, said
“Hassell acted in a significant influence role without FSA approval. This was despite the fact that he knew that the FSA did not regard him as a suitable person to manage the firm.
“Ensuring that the right people are running firms is a key element in our regulatory regime. Individuals who act without FSA approval can expect a tough response from the FSA.”
In June 2010 the FSA fined Vantage £700,000 (after stage one discount) for failing to prevent Hassell from performing a significant influence function.