Abstract:There were 11 underlying issues resulting in failure. The bank was aware of the inaccuracies from mid-2017.
Barclays accepted a censure order imposed by the US Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) for non-compliance with customer confirmation and related supervision rules as well as having agreed to pay a penalty of $2.8 million.
Take Advantage of the Biggest Financial Event in London. This year we have expanded to new verticals in Online Trading, Fintech, Digital Assets, Blockchain, and Payments.
According to the regulatory body‘s order, the multinational bank violated the mandatory rules from November 2008. It sent customers around 270 million confirmations with inaccurate disclosure of execution capacity, the customer’s price, the market center of execution and the trade execution price.
The failure was the result of 11 underlying issues that include technological glitches, drafting errors and a misunderstanding of regulatory guidance. All of these issues have remained undetected for at least five years.
Additionally, the banking giant had no supervisory system to review the accuracy of its confirmations from at least November 2008 till March 2020. Additionally, there is an unreasonable supervisory system in place from April 2020 until now.
Moreover, the order stated that Barclays was aware of the multiple systemic issues resulting in inaccurate confirmation from mid-2017, but the issues still persisted.
Despite Barclays reputation, it has faced multiple regulatory fines over the years. Earlier this year, FINRA slapped the bank with a $350,000 penalty for lapses in market access controls, while the FCA imposed another £783,800 fine for failings in oversight in its relationship with Premier FX.
Also, Barclays paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to FINRA and other US market overseers for other multiple lapses.
However, Barclays is not the only capital market player to face such monetary penalties. Furthermore, FINRA slapped a $9 million penalty on National Securities Corp last week for multiple cases of misconduct.
UBS, another major name in the wealth management and banking industry, recently settled fraud charges brought against it by the SEC paying $25 million for marketing and selling of a complex investment strategy.
Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
In this article, we delve into a thorough examination of Numera International, scrutinizing its key attributes, fee structures, safety protocols, deposit and withdrawal methods, trading platforms, and so on.
In the dynamic realm of foreign exchange trading, the lack of transparency and accountability within forex prop firms in the UK and Europe poses a significant risk to unsuspecting traders. Behind the allure of potential profits lies a murky landscape where opacity reigns, making it challenging for traders to discern legitimate firms from fraudulent operators.
In the complex world of foreign exchange trading, the allure of substantial profits often leads traders to seek out opportunities with forex prop firms. These entities, which provide capital and leverage to traders in exchange for a share of profits, can offer an enticing pathway to financial success. However, beneath the surface lies a shadowy realm where regulatory loopholes and lax oversight create fertile ground for scams and fraudulent activities.
James Glyde introduces PipFarm, based in Singapore, using cTrader to navigate the retail prop trading industry changes driven by MetaQuotes' strategy adjustment