Tel 0034 952883388 Fx 0034 952885643
Guernsey Financial Services.
12 December 02
Dear Mrs. Bailey
Ref Andrea Earl/Brewins/ Offshore Money Managers
I now present to you the following and ask that you take this into consideration.
Brewins stated that they have no intermediary arrangement with Colin McCreedy (OMM). Brewins also stated that there is no agreement in place between the two companies and that there is no commercial relationship.
However, Brewins must have paid commission to OMM as a result of them introducing investment business to them.
Brewins have clearly provided an introductory arrangement for such business and have promoted the introduction of business by providing OMM with the necessary material, information and services for OMM to be capable of introducing investment business to them and, as a result, they ( Brewins and OMM) effected a "commercial transaction" (in the generally accepted sense of the expression) by paying him introductory commission.
I appreciate that under the (rather quirky!) UK law of agency OMM is Andrea Earl's agent in relation to this matter. The same law of agency is not relevant in Spain . The contract was sold and written on Spanish soil.
It is however, in accordance with good business practice, an obligation upon Brewins to ensure that due diligence is carried out in respect of any business introduced to them by somebody who is paid for that purpose. In effect Brewins should have ensured that any introducer is acting in good faith in accordance with the law.
Andrea Earl is a resident of Spain , and as such, OMM acted as an intermediary in relation to the investment advice they provided which is a regulated activity in Spain . OMM is, as you are well aware, not regulated in the conduct of investment business in Spain and regularly intermediates on behalf of his clients, as he did in Andrea Earl's case.
Brewins like all product providers have a duty of care when receiving introductions of new business to ensure that this business is being carried out by their appointed introducer or they are collaborating in encouraging breaches of Spanish regulatory provisions in relation to investment intermediation. Such activity is required to be regulated by the CNMV.
Brewins are also under no obligation to accept business which they do not believe has been sold in accordance with the sovereign laws and regulatory provisions of the territory in which the investment advice and intermediation was provided.
By not ensuring that Brewins introducer carried out his responsibilities in accordance with the requirements of Spanish regulatory provisions Brewins have, knowingly or otherwise, enabled the mis-selling of investments provided by their funds by an unregulated adviser.
As such, I consider that Brewins are, at least, partially responsible for the inappropriate advice and intermediation that took place in connection with the investment recommended to Andrea Earl by OMM which was not suitable irrespective of any (if any) fact find for a lady over 80 years, no other savings and living off a government pension.
There is no doubt that Brewins collaboration with OMM in breaching the Spanish regulatory provisions will be further investigated by the courts who are currently acting on behalf of a number of families who have been mis-sold investments by OMM.
The purpose of my complaint is to achieve financial settlement in relation to the investments that were mis-sold to Andrea Earl. If Brewins are not prepared to recognise their responsibility and offer compensation in respect of their part in enabling OMM, an unregulated business, to sell investment illegally then they are likely to come under increasing scrutiny during the course of the actions which are now taking place to ensure that such flagrant breaches of the national regulatory provisions of Spain cannot be continued with impunity.
For the record I would add that none of this would have come about had both Brewins and OMM conducted their correspondence in a correct honest manner, and much like Alex Ward of RBC who tried his best to fob me off by ignoring 3 communications.
NO REPLY TO THIS COMMUNICATION