简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
Barclays Resolves £40M Fine Over 2008 Fundraising Disclosure Failures
Abstract:Barclays has reached a settlement with the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), agreeing to pay a £40 million fine for failing to adequately disclose arrangements with Qatari investors during its critical fundraising efforts amidst the 2008 financial crisis.

Barclays has reached a settlement with the UKs Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), agreeing to pay a £40 million fine for failing to adequately disclose arrangements with Qatari investors during its critical fundraising efforts amidst the 2008 financial crisis. This agreement marks the conclusion of a protracted regulatory investigation that began in 2013.
The case revolved around undisclosed payments totalling £322 million made by Barclays to Qatari entities through two advisory agreements. These payments were directly linked to Qatari participation in the banks June and October 2008 capital raisings and effectively increased the costs associated with their involvement. The FCA highlighted that this lack of transparency deprived investors of crucial information regarding these financial arrangements.
Regulators initially proposed a £50 million penalty, but the fine was reduced after Barclays withdrew its appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The FCAs enforcement and market oversight joint executive director, Steve Smart, emphasised the gravity of the misconduct, noting its impact on investors who were not provided with all relevant details at the time. However, he acknowledged that the events occurred 16 years ago and that Barclays has since undergone significant organisational changes to improve its practices.

This regulatory resolution comes on the heels of the collapse of a separate criminal case brought by the UKs Serious Fraud Office (SFO) against Barclays and several former executives. The SFO had conducted a five-year investigation into the roles of former Chief Executive John Varley, ex-Middle East investment banking chairman Roger Jenkins, and others. However, the charges did not result in convictions.
In its official statement, Barclays confirmed that it had agreed with the FCA to withdraw its appeals against the regulator‘s findings. The bank reiterated that none of its current board members or senior management were involved in the incidents outlined in the FCA’s notices. The statement also highlighted the substantial improvements made to the banks systems and controls in the years since the 2008 fundraising efforts.
Barclays noted that while it does not accept the FCAs findings, it has chosen to conclude the matter to prioritise the interests of the bank, its shareholders, and other stakeholders. The bank had already accounted for the financial penalty in 2022, ensuring no material financial impact on its operations.
The Barclays settlement underscores the FCA‘s ongoing commitment to addressing corporate misconduct, even years after the events. It also draws comparisons to other recent regulatory actions. Earlier this year, Metro Bank faced a £16.7 million fine for significant anti-money laundering failures that left over £51 billion in transactions insufficiently monitored. Similarly, fines imposed on Starling Bank and Citigroup in 2024 highlight the FCA’s stringent approach to ensuring financial institutions uphold their regulatory obligations.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
Read more

FXPIG Exposed: Traders Report Withdrawal Denials, Fund Scams & Regulatory Flags
Do you face massive losses due to astonishing spreads at FXPIG? Have you witnessed multiple trade executions by the Georgia-based forex broker even though you wanted to execute a single order? Has this piled on losses for you? Is the FXPIG withdrawal too slow? Maybe your trading issues resonate with some of your fellow traders. In this FXPIG review article, we have shared these issues so that you can introspect them thoroughly before deciding on the best forex trader.

Does WealthFX Generate Wealth or Losses for Traders? Find Out in This Review
The name WealthFX sounds appealing for all those wishing for a rewarding forex journey. However, behind the aspiring name are multiple complaints against the Comoros-based forex broker. These trading complaints dampen the broker’s reputation in the forex community. In this WealthFX review article, we have shared some of these complaints here. Take a look!

FONDEX Review: Do Traders Really Face Inflated Spreads & Withdrawal Issues?
Does FONDEX charge you spreads more than advertised to cause you trading losses? Does this situation exist even when opening a forex position? Do you witness customer support issues regarding deposits and withdrawals at FONDEX broker? Does the customer support official fail to explain to you the reason behind your fund loss? In this article, we have shared FONDEX trading complaints. Read on!

IEXS Regulation: A Complete Guide to Its Licenses and Safety Warnings
When choosing a broker, every trader's biggest concern is safety and trust: is it regulated? For IEXS, the answer isn't simply YES or NO. While the company says it's regulated by trusted authorities, looking closer shows a complicated and worrying situation with mixed evidence and serious risks. What they claim on the surface doesn't match up with official warnings, license problems, and many bad user experiences. This article gives you a detailed, fact-based look into IEXS regulations, breaking down their official licenses, what their trading platform is really like, and real stories from traders who have used it. Our goal is to give you the facts so you can make a smart decision about keeping your money safe.

