.jpg)
The FCA went after the wrong person. Mr Tinney was trying to fix Barclays' toxic culture and the cultural and compliance failings of its senior management. Instead he was scapegoated by Barclays' senior management.
Finally, after more than five long years of relentless pursuit by the FCA, Mr Tinney is delighted that the Upper Tribunal has recognised that he did not mislead the FCA nor the New York Fed and no documents were destroyed. The ultimate outcome is that he is free, once again to work for any financial services firm in any role.
Harvey Knight, Partner at the law firm Withers LLP, who has acted for Mr. Tinney throughout this FCA investigation said: "This is an unprecedented Upper Tribunal judgment. With the Upper Tribunal having upheld the FCA's own decision not to fine Mr Tinney, the FCA has also now decided not to pursue a prohibition order against Mr Tinney in the wake of that Upper Tribunal judgment. Put bluntly, Mr Tinney is free to work again in the financial services industry in any role. This is telling. The FCA has serious questions to answer about why it decided to pursue this case."
Background:
- The Upper Tribunal decision released today can be found via the following link
- The Tribunal sat in London in public at the Rolls Building on 23-26 and 30-31 January 2018 and in private on 26 March 2019.
- Mr. Tinney was represented by Guy Philipps QC of Fountain Court Chambers at the January 2018 hearing and by Saima Hanif of 3 Verulam Buildings at the March 2019 hearing, both instructed by Withers LLP.
- Mr. Tinney referred to the Upper Tribunal an earlier decision by the Regulatory Decisions Committee (‘RDC’) of the Financial Conduct Authority published on 14 September 2016.
