glyder
Established member
- Messages
- 755
- Likes
- 94
Interesting market abuse case.
I see he is prevented from commiting market abuse by an injunction.
Does this mean he can no longer trade at all or do they just trust that he will
be legit from now on because a court says he must be?
And its weird that his surname look first when its not.
Summary
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2011/053.shtml
Final Notice
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/alexander_barnett.pdf
Banned
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/indivBasicDetails.do?sid=597965
14 June 2011
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has obtained a court order preventing Barnett Michael Alexander, a self employed trader, from committing market abuse and ordering him to pay a £700,000 fine and £322,818 in restitution to firms which experienced a loss as a result of his actions.
The FSA has also banned Alexander from performing any function in relation to a regulated activity, and he has transferred to the firms a further £306,312 held in trading accounts controlled by him.
In the period 1 January 2009 to 25 May 2010 Alexander, an experienced trader and former private client stockbroker, was operating as a self-employed trader dealing in shares and retail derivative products such as contracts for differences (CFDs) and spread bets from his home address.
Alexander manipulated the prices of shares on the London Stock Exchange by entering multiple small orders to buy and sell shares. The purpose of these orders was to manipulate the price of CFDs and spread bets, which track the price of shares. Alexander generated £629,130 by trading CFDs and spread bets at the prices he created through his share price manipulation, and frequently used CFD and spread betting accounts in the names of third parties to disguise his behaviour. This manipulation of the prices of shares and derivatives at the expense of the firms amounts to market abuse.
In May 2010 the FSA obtained a temporary injunction from the High Court preventing Alexander from committing market abuse, and froze £1 million of his assets. This was the first FSA injunction preventing market abuse. The High Court has now made that order permanent and has ordered Alexander to pay the fine and restitution. The permanent injunction is the second the FSA has obtained against an individual for market abuse.
Tracey McDermott, the FSA’s acting director of enforcement and financial crime, said:
“The FSA views market manipulation extremely seriously. Alexander’s behaviour was deliberate and repeated over a significant period of time. He sought to conceal his trading and made substantial profits at the expense of the firms which allowed him to trade with them.
“The court action shows the FSA’s determination to use all our powers to prevent market abuse and to pursue those who commit it.”
The FSA has taken into account the fact that Alexander was a self employed trader, not working in the financial services industry, at the time of the misconduct and that he has fully admitted his market abuse. For these reasons the ban has been limited to a minimum term of five years.
Alexander agreed to settle at an early stage of the FSA's investigation and consented to the court order. He therefore qualifies for a 30% discount on his financial penalty (but not the requirement to make restitution). Were it not for this discount, the FSA would have asked the court to impose a financial penalty of £1,000,000 on Alexander.
I see he is prevented from commiting market abuse by an injunction.
Does this mean he can no longer trade at all or do they just trust that he will
be legit from now on because a court says he must be?
And its weird that his surname look first when its not.
Summary
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2011/053.shtml
Final Notice
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/alexander_barnett.pdf
Banned
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/indivBasicDetails.do?sid=597965
14 June 2011
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has obtained a court order preventing Barnett Michael Alexander, a self employed trader, from committing market abuse and ordering him to pay a £700,000 fine and £322,818 in restitution to firms which experienced a loss as a result of his actions.
The FSA has also banned Alexander from performing any function in relation to a regulated activity, and he has transferred to the firms a further £306,312 held in trading accounts controlled by him.
In the period 1 January 2009 to 25 May 2010 Alexander, an experienced trader and former private client stockbroker, was operating as a self-employed trader dealing in shares and retail derivative products such as contracts for differences (CFDs) and spread bets from his home address.
Alexander manipulated the prices of shares on the London Stock Exchange by entering multiple small orders to buy and sell shares. The purpose of these orders was to manipulate the price of CFDs and spread bets, which track the price of shares. Alexander generated £629,130 by trading CFDs and spread bets at the prices he created through his share price manipulation, and frequently used CFD and spread betting accounts in the names of third parties to disguise his behaviour. This manipulation of the prices of shares and derivatives at the expense of the firms amounts to market abuse.
In May 2010 the FSA obtained a temporary injunction from the High Court preventing Alexander from committing market abuse, and froze £1 million of his assets. This was the first FSA injunction preventing market abuse. The High Court has now made that order permanent and has ordered Alexander to pay the fine and restitution. The permanent injunction is the second the FSA has obtained against an individual for market abuse.
Tracey McDermott, the FSA’s acting director of enforcement and financial crime, said:
“The FSA views market manipulation extremely seriously. Alexander’s behaviour was deliberate and repeated over a significant period of time. He sought to conceal his trading and made substantial profits at the expense of the firms which allowed him to trade with them.
“The court action shows the FSA’s determination to use all our powers to prevent market abuse and to pursue those who commit it.”
The FSA has taken into account the fact that Alexander was a self employed trader, not working in the financial services industry, at the time of the misconduct and that he has fully admitted his market abuse. For these reasons the ban has been limited to a minimum term of five years.
Alexander agreed to settle at an early stage of the FSA's investigation and consented to the court order. He therefore qualifies for a 30% discount on his financial penalty (but not the requirement to make restitution). Were it not for this discount, the FSA would have asked the court to impose a financial penalty of £1,000,000 on Alexander.
So he was looking for lowish liquidity shares that he had enough size to shift then taking a side bet with a bookie:clap: 
