The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has banned a financial adviser from carrying out regulated activity after his involvement with fraudulent investment schemes.
According to a final notice handed down by the FCA, Simon Oakley is prohibited from performing any function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by an authorised person, exempt person or exempt professional firm.
Between 27 August 2009 and 31 May 2018, Oakley was approved by the authority to perform the following roles: CF1 (Director), CF10 (Compliance Oversight), CF11 (Money Laundering Reporting), CF30 (Customer) and he was responsible for insurance mediation.
The FCA said: “It appears to the authority that Mr Oakley is not a fit and proper person to perform any function in relation to any regulated activity carried out by an authorised person, exempt person or exempt professional firm.
“Mr Oakley’s conviction demonstrates that he is not fit and proper to perform regulated activities as his conduct demonstrated a serious degree of recklessness and therefore a lack of integrity.”
Guilty
Oakley pleaded guilty on 12 October 2017 to two counts of making misleading, false or deceptive statements and was sentenced to imprisonment for 30 months on 15 November 2017.
Between 1 September 2010 and 1 October 2012, Oakley was involved in promoting two fraudulent investment schemes where 21 victims invested and lost over £2.3m ($2.93m, €2.5m).
The schemes were not regulated investments.
In sentencing Oakley, Judge Kearl said:
- Oakley’s degree of recklessness involved in the first fraudulent scheme was high and the statements that he made were irresponsible and without foundation.
- Oakley’s conduct in relation to the second fraudulent scheme was at an even higher level than the first fraudulent scheme. He misled people into investing in the knowledge that the first fraudulent scheme had failed and, in hiding that knowledge from the investors, this was “almost as close to fraud as is possible”.
- Oakley personally sold the schemes and ignored all of the red flags, repeatedly assuring investors that the schemes were working when he knew that they were not.
- The financial consequences to others had been devastating and his conduct had undermined confidence in the markets.
