sunnydonkey
Registered User
- Messages
- 118
Penalties in general are too soft and are usually lower than the gain that the company has made from breaking the rules.I begin to think this penalty was way too soft.
The Transaction involved an off-market transfer.2 Following instructions, Davy transferred the bonds internally from the Client’s account to the Consortium’s account on System B. A payment was made by Davy, from Davy funds, on behalf of the Committee. This was repaid by the Committee later the same day. Three weeks later the Consortium sold a large tranche of the bonds to a fund manager. In the weeks prior to that sale, certain Consortium members engaged with interested buyers to provide a Davy “house view” on the value of the bonds. In so doing, the Consortium members drew no distinction between whether they were acting in a professional capacity (i.e. as broker) or personal capacity, as the seller of the bonds.
During the course of that engagement, the Committee member misled Davy Compliance by not providing relevant information in relation to the type of transaction contemplated – the most glaring omission being a failure to tell Davy Compliance that it was a personal transaction involving a group of Davy employees
It took place in 2014. Davy settled in 2016 with the client.Now that the Central Bank has finished its work, will An Garda Síochána be investigating ?
Prompt payment discount. They probably wrote the Central Bank a cheque right away.“The Central Bank determined the appropriate fine to be €5,900,000, which was reduced by 30% to €4,130,000 in accordance with the settlement discount scheme provided for in the Central Bank’s Administrative Sanctions Procedure”
why did they get 30pc discount given “lack of candour” “misleading information” etc? I had thought the discount was given if they were cooperative and saved the CBI time and money. Maybe they did in the end.
They won't be investigating. The client sued them in court and the Central Bank have fined them.Now that the Central Bank has finished its work, will An Garda Síochána be investigating ?
This is coming from the very top, with the chief exec involved in it. There is a culture in Davy to make money at every opportunity.I'm just amazed that no one has had to walk the plank, over this.
I'm just amazed that no one has had to walk the plank, over this.
It will be interesting if they found anymore staff transactions on "System B"
You didn't read the Central Bank report I take it?Those deals are kept in drawers not on systems!
Interesting to read that Brian McKiernan, Davy's boss, who was also centrally involved in the infamous transaction, revised the wording of an email to staff yesterday. In the first version, he wrote "While there are no findings of actual conflict of interest or customer loss ..". That clause was dropped in the second version: "There were significant shortcomings in how the transaction was conducted, particularly in the context of the policies and controls relating to the management of potential conflicts of interest". Was the change of wording due to CBI intervention?
YesInteresting to read that Brian McKiernan, Davy's boss, who was also centrally involved in the infamous transaction, revised the wording of an email to staff yesterday. In the first version, he wrote "While there are no findings of actual conflict of interest or customer loss ..". That clause was dropped in the second version: "There were significant shortcomings in how the transaction was conducted, particularly in the context of the policies and controls relating to the management of potential conflicts of interest". Was the change of wording due to CBI intervention?
Remaining junior Anglo bondholders, including whoever ultimately owned the notes at the centre of the O’Connell Partnership trade, were made whole at the end of 2019 as IBRC’s liquidation generated higher proceeds than had been expected when the plug was pulled in early 2013.
Sources say that some of the 16 continued to hold the Anglo bonds for some years after the 2014 trade. A spokesman for Davy declined to say whether any still held bonds when IBRC’s liquidators effectively took them out at par value
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?