Pursuant to ss56 and 66 Financial Services and Markets Act, the UK's regulator has fined Elizabeth Anne Parry £109,400 and banned her from performing any regulated function because she claimed falsely to have a qualification from the Chartered Insurance Institute.

From 2013 onwards, as part of its Retail Distribution Review, the Financial Conduct Authority brought in a new set of rules that raised the minimum level of qualification for all retail investment advisors was raised and they were required to hold "Statements of Professional Standing." An SPS is evidence that an accredited body that meets the FCA’s criteria has verified that the retail investment advisor holds an appropriate qualification, has satisfied the appropriate continuing professional development (CPD) requirement and is up to the requisite ethical standards. In order to continue to be allowed to perform the FCA's 'CF30' customer function at her sole-trader firm (which was itself authorised by the regulator and had been since 2006) she fabricated two SPSes on two separate occasions.

In October 2013, Parry submitted a fabricated document to the FCA, which purported to be an SPS issued by the CII which would remain valid until January 2014. In May 2014 the FCA asked her to verify that she had obtained the appropriate qualifications, whereupon she submitted a second bogus SPS. She also made misleading statements to the FCA throughout 2013, in June 2014 and in September 2015, intimating that she had attained the appropriate qualifications and, eventually, that she had engaged in numerous dealings with her professional body on the subject of why it had not supplied her with an SPS.

Delaying tactics

In early 2013, the authority contacted Parry about its concerns that the CII had not accredited as she had claimed on a Professional Standards Data (PSD) form. In May she replied, saying that she had been in contact with the CII on numerous occasions to find out why the CII’s database did not show that it had given her an SPS. She stated that the CII had explained that this was because she had changed her surname after a divorce, from Thompson to Parry, and that the system had not reconciled the records of examinations she had sat in each name. In an email in early September 2013 she told the FCA that she had telephoned the CII but that her contact there was on holiday and that she would be back in touch in a week. Weeks later in mid-October, she sent the FCA another email to say that she had spoken to the CII at length in relation to her SPS and that the CII had said that it had still not resolved the issue of merging her online data for her different names and qualifications. She also stated that her case had been referred to the head of the CII’s online data technical team who had assured her that he would have a solution on or before 18 October 2013.

On 23rd October, Parry sent an email to the FCA with a fabricated SPS attached. It said that the CII had issued it on 1 February 2013 and that it would remain valid until 31 January 2014, (the date by which she was required to renew her CII membership). She also stated that she was not convinced that the CII’s online system had been rectified as she was unable to access her on-line account. In May 2014, the FCA sent her an email asking her to verify her qualifications. On two dates in July 2014, Parry sent the FCA a second fabricated document that purported to be an SPS issued by the CII on 1st February 2014, with an expiry date of 31st January 2015. This kept the regulators at bay for a time.

In June 2015, in answer to some FCA enquiries about the validity of Parry’s qualifications, the CII said that it had no record of her applying for, or being issued with, an SPS. It added that she had not obtained the necessary Level 4 QCF qualification that she needed in order to provide retail investment advice. The FCA rang Parry, who stated that the CII had sent her manual SPSes because of problems that it was having with its systems relating to her name change and that the CII’s records were incorrect. She also stated that it ‘simply was not true’ that the CII had not issued her with an SPS and that she had records to prove it.

Not fit and proper

As a result of all this, the FCA has concluded that Parry lacks honesty and integrity and, therefore, is not a 'fit and proper' person to be licensed for business. Elizabeth Parry ceased to be authorised in November 2015 and has ceased trading. She provided the regulator with evidence - verifiable, this time - of serious financial hardship. Had it not been for her financial circumstances, she would have had to pay £157,395 plus interest.