Financial Conduct Authority
Breach of PSRs – FCA publishes final notice issued to Premier FX – 25 February 2021
The FCA has published the final notice it has issued to Premier FX Ltd (in liquidation), previously an authorised payment institution (API).
The final notice censures Premier FX for failing to safeguard its customers’ money and for misuse of its payment accounts under the Payment Services Regulations 2009 and the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (collectively, the PSRs).
The FCA found that Premier FX seriously misled its customers by informing them that it was able to hold their funds indefinitely, that their funds would be held in a secure, segregated client account, and that their funds would be protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. None of these claims were true. Premier FX was not permitted to hold its customers’ funds indefinitely as this may have constituted accepting deposits, which is separately regulated under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
Were Premier FX not in liquidation with a significant liability to its creditors (most of whom are consumers), the FCA states that it would have imposed a substantial financial penalty.
FCA final notice imposed on Premier FX
Updated webpage
Press release
Recent cases
CFL Finance Ltd v Laser Trust & another [2021] EWCA Civ 228, 23 February 2021
On 23 February 2021, the Court of Appeal handed down a judgment relating to when, if ever, the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the CCA) applies to agreements settling litigation.
The Court of Appeal stated that the CCA does not apply to an agreement by which a creditor agrees for no consideration to allow a debtor more time to pay. However, if the debtor and the creditor enter into an agreement pursuant to which, for consideration, the creditor agrees to accept payment by instalment, then the debtor has been provided with credit within the meaning of the CCA, and the agreement would fall under the CCA. Insofar as the debtor enters into the agreement to pay at a future date, it does not matter if they initially put up a defence against being liable for the payment due.
Following this, the Court of Appeal ruled that the settlement agreement concerned provided the debtor with credit under the CCA, and therefore had to be compliant with the CCA. Further, the Court of Appeal ruled that the settlement agreement was unenforceable for non-compliance with several sections of the CCA, and the respondent was allowed to make a cross-appeal of the judgment handed down by the High Court.
CFL Finance Ltd v Laser Trust & another [2021]
