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

Seacrest Markets Exposed: Are You Facing Payout Denials and Spread Issues with This Prop Firm?
Seacrest Markets has garnered wrath from traders owing to a variety of reasons, including payout denials for traders winning trading challenges, high slippage causing losses, the lack of response from the customer support official to address withdrawal issues, and more. Irritated by these trading inefficiencies, a lot of traders have given a negative review of Seacrest Markets prop firm. In this article, we have shared some of them. Take a look!

GKFX Review: Are Traders Facing Slippage and Account Freeze Issues?
Witnessing capital losses despite tall investment return assurances by GKFX officials? Do these officials sound too difficult for you to judge, whether they offer real or fake advice? Do you encounter slippage issues causing a profit reduction on the GKFX login? Is account freezing usual at GKFX? Does the United Kingdom-based forex broker prevent you from accessing withdrawals? You are not alone! In this GKFX review guide, we have shared the complaints. Take a look!

Is Seaprimecapitals Regulated? A Complete Look at Its Safety and How It Works
The straightforward answer to this important question is no. Seaprimecapitals works as a broker without proper regulation. This fact is the most important thing any trader needs to know, because it creates serious risks for your capital and how safely the company operates. While this broker offers some good features, like the popular MetaTrader 5 platform and a low starting deposit, these benefits cannot make up for the major risks that come from having no real financial supervision. This article will give you a detailed, fact-based look at Seaprimecapitals regulation, what the company claims to do, the services it provides, and the clear differences between official information and user reviews. Our purpose is to give you the information you need to make a smart decision about the risks and benefits of working with this company.

Europol Cyber-Patrol Week Targets $55M Crypto Piracy
Europol’s Cyber-Patrol Week exposed $55M in illicit crypto tied to IPTV piracy, disrupting sites and strengthening EU intellectual property enforcement.
