My Basket0

Breaches of CII Code of Ethics

Breaches of the CII Code of Ethics

Where the Preliminary Screener (cases prior to May 2013), Case Examiner or  Disciplinary Panel has decided to publish details of a disciplinary case ascribed (i.e. where an individual has been named), every care has been taken to identify members/students correctly. Please contact the CII if there is any doubt about the identity of a member/student who may have been the subject of disciplinary proceedings and in relation to whom a report has been published.

CII wishes to make clear that, unless the case reported indicates otherwise, allegations and findings against members/students do not implicate those members' or students' employers in any way.

Ian Manwaring – CFM Investments Limited, Hednesford Staffordshire

The Respondent was convicted of a criminal offence in breach of the CII’s Code of Ethics. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Is declared ineligible to apply for member of the Institute for three years, the maximum permitted under the current Disciplinary Regulations (Reg 12.6(m)). This took effect from 30 August 2019, the date on which his membership ceased; and b) Will have a record of this matter added to the CII’s disciplinary records under his name (Reg 12.6(f)).

Mohammad Usman Khan  – Aman Insurance Head Office, 20th St. Oud Mehta, Dubai

In breach of the CII’s Code of Ethics, the Respondent falsified an R01 exam result and learning statement to give the appearance that he had passed the exam when he had not. Having done so he then submitted these to an employer to give the impression he had passed the exam and was entitled to work as a trainee advisor when he had not. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d), to be completed within six months of the date of the Order; c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); d) Be excluded for a period of 36 months from the examinations or assessments held by the Institute with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6l); e) Be excluded for a period of 36 months from applying for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order (Reg 12.6p); f) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of the exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p); g) Be declared ineligible to apply for membership of the Institute for 3 years (Reg 12.6m and Reg 12.6p).

David Gunnersen – Midas Fides, 35 Hazlemere, Penn, Buckinghamshire

The Respondent was convicted of criminal offences in breach of the CII’s Code of Ethics. Further, the Respondent subsequently failed to disclose these convictions to the CII within a reasonable time, in breach of his obligations under the CII’s Code of Ethics. The CII Case Examiner was satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 (b). On 8 April 2020, the Case Examiner ordered that the Respondent: a) Be reprimanded (Reg 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line Ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (Reg 12.6d); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records. (Reg 12.6f); and d) Pay a fine of £1,000 to charity.

Anthony Badaloo, of Church Hill Finance, 178 Church Hill Road, East Barnet, Hertfordshire

The Respondent 1) Failed to disclose breaches of the cii code of ethics; 2) He failed to notify the CII of the findings and sanctions imposed upon him under the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) Final Notice dated 9 November 2017; and 3) His conduct was unprofessional in uploading inaccurate and unprofessional statements to his social media page. The Respondent failed to co-operate with the CII during the investigation. The Respondent disputed the evidence but failed to provide evidence to support his arguments, despite being given numerous opportunities to do so. The Case Examiner was therefore satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The Case Examiner Ordered, with effect from 2 July 2019, for the following sanctions to be imposed on the Respondent: 1) Be reprimanded for the breaches above (DR 12.6a); 2) Take and complete the CII online ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (either as a member or non-member)(DR 12.6d); 3) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f); 4) Be expelled from the CII (Reg 12.6i), with any re-application for membership being subject to review; 5) Be required: i) to return his membership card, or complete and return the CII Statement of Truth (if item lost by Respondent), and ii) to remove the offending posts referred to above from his social media page, within two weeks from the date of the Order (Reg 12.6p). 

Ryan Caisley, Financial Solutions Wales Ltd., Llanelli, UK

The Respondent had failed to disclose that he was charged with actual bodily harm when applying for membership of the CII.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 16 November 2018.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded (DR 12.6a); b) Take and complete the CII on line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning or within 6 months (if sooner). (DR 12.6d); c) Be ineligible from applying for membership for a period of 18 months, after this period, the Respondent can only join the CII subject to the approval of the CII’s Membership Application Sub-Committee (Reg 12.6p). d) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records (DR 12.6f).

Nicolas Roberts, Dip PFS, Origen Financial Services, 1 Lakeside Road, Farnborough, Hampshire

The Respondent was convicted in January 2013 for failing to stop after an accident and driving/ being in charge a motor vehicle while above the alcohol limit (these convictions are now spent). The Respondent had breached his obligations under the CII Code of Ethics and failed to disclose these convictions to the CII within a reasonable time and falsely or recklessly declared that he had no convictions when he applied for CII membership in May 2016. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 23 August 2018. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded; b) take and complete the CII on-line ethics course before booking any further CII examinations, enrolling on any CII assessments or applying for any CII recognition of prior learning (either as a member or non-member); c) Have a record of this matter be added to the CII’s disciplinary records; d) Be suspended from membership for a period of 3 years from the date of this Order. However, in light of the Respondent’s contrition and cooperation, this element of the sanctions is suspended for a period of 3 years from the date of this Order and will, subject to the Respondent not being found to have breached the Code of Ethics during this time, automatically expire following this 3-year period (Reg 12.6h and p). If a further breach occurs during this period, the 3-year suspension will automatically be triggered, in addition to any further sanctions imposed by a CII Case Examiner and/or Disciplinary Panel.

Michael Philip Pearse, of Fulford, York, North Yorkshire

The Respondent was convicted of fraud by engaging in acts of false accounting, which is a breach of the CII Code of Ethics. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 13 March 2018. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent was (a) reprimanded, (b) required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning or re-join as a member; and (c) ineligible from membership of the CII/PFS for a period of 2 ½ years.

John Maurice Pye, of Waterstone Investment Associates, Inc., Advanced Tower, 1st Floor, Ricardo Arias Street, Panama

The Respondent was found to have breached the CII Code of Ethics through his repeated misuse of CII Intellectual Property and failure to co-operate with the CII during its investigation. In view of the seriousness of Mr Pye’s conduct, the CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 9 March 2018. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent was (a) reprimanded, (b) required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments or apply for any CII recognition of prior learning; and (c) suspended from membership of the CII/PFS for a period of 2 years.

David Dunlop, of KMC Wealth Management, Craigavon, County Armagh

The Respondent was convicted for a drink-driving offence in March 2017. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 5 December 2017. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent be reprimanded and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course.

Unascribed case

The Respondent behaved aggressively and acted unprofessionally towards other colleagues at a dinner event held by a local Insurance Institute on 22 January 2016.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 4 December 2017. The sanctions imposed were that: the Respondent be reprimanded; be suspended from membership for a period of 18 months; and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course. In light of mitigating evidence provided by the Respondent, the CII considers that the 18 month suspension should itself be suspended for a period of 2 years, following which it shall expire unless the Respondent is found to have breached any other aspects of the CII’s Code of Ethics during this period. If a further breach occurs during this period, the 18 month suspension will automatically trigger in addition to any further sanction imposed by a CII Case Examiner and/or Disciplinary Panel.

Mark Taylor Royston Hertfordshire, UK

Mr Taylor, whilst working as an experienced financial adviser at Towry Limited, was subject to a Final Notice for market abuse, issued by the FCA on 5 May 2016. Whilst Mr Taylor is no longer a member of the CII, he was a member at the time of the market abuse. In view of the seriousness of Mr Taylor’s conduct, the CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed, and which came into effect on 29 November 2017. The sanctions imposed were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) he was required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments c) be declared ineligible to apply for membership of the CII/PFS for a period of 2 years, such ineligibility to take effect from 1 September 2016.  

Shani Odedra, Leicester, UK

The Respondent was found to have falsified his FA7 result and held himself out as having passed the exam when he had not. The Respondent refused to co-operate with the CII during the investigation. The Respondent was given opportunities to challenge the evidence and did not place any alternative positions to the evidence, despite being given numerous opportunities to do so. The Case Examiner was therefore satisfied to proceed to determine the matter under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1(b). The sanctions imposed on the Respondent were: a) That he be reprimanded; b) Take and complete the CII online Ethics course; c) Be declared ineligible for membership of the CII for the maximum period of 3 years; d) Be excluded for a period of 36 months from the examinations or assessments with effect from the date of the order or from applying for CII recognition of prior learning; and e) No examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the period of exclusion will be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning with effect from the date of the order.

Unascribed Case

The Respondent was subject to an IVA from 2006 to 2011. The Respondent failed to declare his IVA whilst being a member. This failure to report was a breach of the Code of Ethics and Conduct to the CII. The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 18 September 2017. The sanctions imposed were: 1. That the Respondent be reprimanded; and 2. Take and complete the CII online Ethics course before attempting to book any further CII examinations, enroll on any CII assessments, apply for any recognition of prior learning (either a member or non-member, renew membership or within 3 months, whichever is sooner).

David MacDonald APFS, Chartered Financial Planner, St James Place, York House, 23 Kingsway, London UK

The Respondent had been convicted of drink driving.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which the came into effect on 7 September 2017.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent be reprimanded and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course.

Charles Humphreys, Travelers Management Ltd, Exchequer Court, 33 St Mary Axe, London, UK

The Respondent was a former member of the CII who on re-application for membership failed to disclose a previous disciplinary decision to the CII, failed to comply with a previous Order and was found to have provided incorrect information to the investigation. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 15 May 2017. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded for the breaches, b) be declared ineligible for membership for 18 months, c) be required to take the CII on-line ethics course.

Jay Solder, Romford, Essex, UK

The Respondent was a member of the CII at the time of the offences and had been convicted of six counts of fraud by misrepresentation which he had not disclosed to the CII. The Respondent's membership of the CII had now lapsed. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 11 May 2017. The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded for the breaches, b) be declared ineligible for membership for the maximum period of three  years, c) be required  to take the CII on-line ethics course.

Richard Hill Dip PFS, Cert CII (FS), Hill and Co Financial Advisers, Newport, UK

The Respondent had been convicted of drink driving. Although subsequently self declared, the Respondent failed to advise the CII within a reasonable timeframe.   The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which the came into effect on 15 February 2017.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent be reprimanded and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course.

John Baty Cert PFS, Harrogate, UK

The Respondent had been subject to an individual voluntary arrangement and had been disciplined by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) as a result.  Although subsequently self declared, the Respondent failed to advise the CII at the time of both issues. It was accepted that the oversight was accidental.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 31 January 2017.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent be reprimanded and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course.

Hayley Gould, Universal Worldwide Enterprises Ltd, Stoke on Trent, UK

The Respondent had failed to disclose her prior insolvency when applying for membership of the CII.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which the came into effect on 29 September 2016.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent a) be reprimanded, b) would have to take the CII on-line ethics course, c) could only continue in membership subject to the approval of the Membership Application Sub- Committee, d) will be suspended from membership of the CII for a period of one year should any further breaches of the Code of Ethics be proven against the Respondent within the next three years.

John Field, Haselmere, Surrey, UK

The Respondent was convicted of fraud by abuse of his position of trust and theft.  The Respondent had breached his obligations under the CII Code of Ethics. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 21 June 2016.  The sanctions imposed were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded, b) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 3 years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future c) be ineligible to apply for membership of the Institute for 3 years.

Alexander Stuart of Bayswater, London W2, UK

The respondent falsified a CII learning statement to show that he had passed the R03, R04, R05 and R06 examinations when he had not.  He used the learning statement to pass himself off as having completed these exams in order to apply for a Statement of Professional Standing in breach of the CII's Code of Ethics.  The CII Case Examiner, invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 18 May 2016.  The sanctions issued were that the Respondent: a) be reprimanded, b)  be expelled from membership of the CII, c) be excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 18 months and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams and assessments or applying for recognition of prior learning in future or applying  for a review of his exclusion from the CII and d) would not be eligible for CII recognition of prior learning for examinations, assessments or qualifications obtained by the Respondent during the 18 month period of examination exclusion in c) above.  The Case Examiner reduced the sanction which would otherwise have been applied in respect of the offence for c) and d) from 3 years in the light of the Respondent's early admission of the charge.

James Gent ACII, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK

The Respondent has accepted that he was in breach of the CII Code of Ethics as he was the subject of a Consent Order lodged in the High Court in which he accepted that he had taken documents and confidential information from his former employer without authority. Moreover, he had failed to disclose the offence and Consent Order to the CII.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 21January 2016.  The sanctions imposed were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) he was required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments c) he was suspended from membership of the CII for 3 years. 

James Werts, Reading, Berkshire, UK

The Respondent has accepted that he was in breach of the CII Code of Ethics as he was the subject of a Consent Order lodged in the High Court in which he accepted that he had taken documents and confidential information from his former employer without authority. Moreover, he had failed to disclose the offence and Consent Order to the CII.  The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 23 December 2015.  The sanctions imposed were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) he was required to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments c) he was unable to apply for membership of the CII for 3 years. 

David Williamson, Wandsworth, London, UK

The Respondent falsified an exam result notification and held himself out as having passed an examination which he had failed. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 22 December 2015.  The sanctions imposed were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) he was excluded from CII examinations and assessments for 2 years and would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any CII exams or assessments d) he was ineligible to apply for membership of the CII for 3 years. 

Leanne Nicholson, Darley Abbey, Derby, UK

The Respondent had been convicted of fraud by abuse of position whilst a member of the CII. As the CII Case Examiner had been unable to agree a Consensual Order with the Respondent under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2015, the Case Examiner made a determination under Disciplinary Procedure Rule 7.1 on 3 March 2015. The Case Examiner determination stated that the Respondent was ineligible to reapply for membership of the CII and that no application for review of the Case Examiner's decision was permissible until the expiration of five years from the date of the Case Examiner's decision.  The Respondent did not appeal the decision.

David Jeffs, Nottingham, UK

The Respondent had been convicted of murder and fraud by abuse of position. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 21 January 2015. The sanction issued was that Mr Jeffs was expelled from membership of the CII.

Angela Lauder, Selkirk, UK

The respondent had been convicted of fraud. She was also found to have continued to advertise herself upon LinkedIn as a Chartered Financial Planner despite not being a current member of the CII. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the CII Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 15 January 2015. The sanction issued was that Mrs Lauder was expelled from membership of the CII.

Robin Smith, formally Cert CII, Woking, Surrey, UK

Mr Smith failed to bring to the attention of the Institute that in 2013 he had been convicted of fraud in breach of sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.6, 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 and 4.5 of the CII Code of Ethics.  Having considered the circumstances, the CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013.  The Respondent failed to respond.  Consequently, under Rule 7.1 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules, the CII Case Examiner determined that the Respondent be reprimanded and be expelled from the Institute.  This came into effect on Thursday 29 May 2014.

Mr Ewan King, Maddison Wealth, Sheffield, UK

Mr King, not having the qualifications necessary to hold a Statement of Professional Standing (SPS) was found to have produced a fraudulent SPS with the intent of misrepresenting his level of expertise and misleading the regulator and the public at large. The CII Case Examiner invited the Respondent to approve and sign a Consensual Order under Rule 9.1 of the Disciplinary Procedure Rules 2013, to which the Respondent agreed and which came into effect on 18 October 2013. The sanctions imposed were that: a) the Respondent was reprimanded, b) he was expelled from the Institute with any re-application for membership being subject to review, c) he would have to take the CII on-line ethics course before taking any further CII exams or applying for a review of his CII membership status.

Mr Lee Clarke DipPFS, Penarth, Vale of Glamorgan, UK

Appeal Hearing 19 July 2012 - Appellant CII

The CII appealed a decision of a Disciplinary Panel dated 28 February 2012 which had previously upheld the prosecution's case videlicet that the Respondent was liable for 4 breaches of the Institute's Code of Ethics, namely paragraphs 1.3, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4. The Disciplinary Panel determined that Mr Clarke was to be suspended from membership for 24 months to run concurrently from the date of his convictions for serious criminal offences.

As Appellant the CII served a notice of appeal on 20 March in accordance with Rule 36(b) on the single ground that the sanction was too lenient, noting that by applying the suspension retrospectively the effective period of suspension was reduced from 2 years to 7 months and that the Respondent had benefitted from his failure to notify the CII of his convictions.

Having considered the matter the Appeal Panel determined that the penalty should be one of greater severity than that ordered at the original hearing and that an order of suspension was insufficient to protect the public interest in the widest sense.

The Appeal Panel consequently ordered that the Respondent, Mr Lee Clarke, be expelled from membership of the Institute.

Mr Richard K Boakye-Ansah Dip CII of Harpurhay, Manchester, UK (now residing in Monrovia, Liberia)

1 December 2011 - A Disciplinary Panel upheld the complaints against Mr Richard Boakye-Ansah. The CII had been notified following an investigation by the Member's employer relating to the falsification of receipts. Mr Boakye-Ansah had falsified CII invoices with the intent of claiming inflated amounts from his employer for CII study materials and examinations. Following further CII investigation it appeared not only was there evidence of falsification but also that the Member had created a false identity and failed to declare a conviction to the CII when applying for re-admission following an earlier lapse in his membership.

In light of the seriousness of the Member's conduct the Panel ordered that the Member be expelled from the Institute and prohibited from taking CII examinations for a period of three years. In addition the Panel applied conditions for any subsequent application for re-admittance, taking CII examinations, following any CII approved course of study or training and that the Member pay the CII all sums due in respect of the services and materials unlawfully procured. Finally the member would be required take and pass the CII's Ethics online course, make full disclosure to the CII of the outcome or status of any investigation related to employer's Disciplinary hearing and in particular any disciplinary and/or criminal charges that resulted. In respect of the Member's failure to disclose a conviction, the Member was reprimanded.

alt