FINAL NOTICE

The Directors
Safe Claims Limited
Office 24
8-9 Rodney Road
Portsmouth
PO4 8BF


ACTION

1. By an application dated 31 May 2019 (“the Application”), Safe Claims Limited (“Safe
Claims”) applied under section 55A of the Act for Part 4A permission to carry on the
regulated activities of:

i. Seeking out, referrals and identification of claims or potential claims (personal
injury claim; financial services or financial product claim; housing disrepair claim;
claim for a specified benefit; criminal injury claim; employment related claim);
and

ii. Advice, investigation or representation in relation to a financial services or
financial product claim.

2. The Application is complete but further information has been requested in relation to Safe
Claim’s lack of management and communication whilst the director was absent and SMCR
documents to assist the Authority in determining the Application.

3. For the reasons listed below, the Authority has decided to refuse the Application.

SUMMARY OF REASONS

4. By its Warning Notice dated 17 March 2021, the Authority gave notice that it proposed
to refuse the Application and that Safe Claims was entitled to make representations to
the Authority about that proposed action.

5. As no representations were received by the Authority from Safe Claims within the time
allowed by the Warning Notice, the default procedures in paragraph 2.3.2 of the
Authority’s Decision Procedure and Penalties Manual applied, permitting the Authority to
treat the matters referred to in its Warning Notice as undisputed and, accordingly, to give
a Decision Notice.

6. By its Decision Notice dated 11 May 2021, the Authority gave Safe Claims notice that it
had decided to take the action described above.

7. Safe Claims had 28 days from the date the Decision Notice was given to refer the
matter to the Tribunal. No referral was made to the Tribunal within this period of time
or to date.

8. Under section 390(1) of the Act, the Authority, having decided to refuse the Application
and there having been no reference of that decision to the Tribunal, must give Safe
Claims a Final Notice of its refusal.


9. Safe Claims has failed to respond to 14 requests for the provision of information
considered by the Authority to be necessary to allow the Application to be determined.
The last request included a statement to the effect that Safe Claims must contact the
Authority within 10 business days, or the Authority would recommend to the Authority’s
RTC that Safe Claims receive a Warning Notice. No response was received.

10. The Authority has therefore determined the Application based upon the information
received to date, in circumstances where its requests for information have not been met.
Having reviewed that information, the Authority cannot ensure that Safe Claims satisfies,
and will continue to satisfy, the threshold conditions.

11. Authorised firms (and those seeking authorisation) are expected to engage with the
Authority in an open and cooperative way. The failure to provide the requested
information raises concerns that Safe Claims would fail to do so if the Application were
to be granted.

12. The failure to provide the information raises concerns as to whether Safe Claims:

a. can be effectively supervised by the Authority as required by threshold condition
2C (Effective Supervision);

b. has appropriate human resources, given Safe Claims’ failure to provide the
Authority with the requested information as required by threshold condition 2D
(Appropriate Resources); and

c. will conduct its business with integrity and in compliance with proper standards
as required by threshold condition 2E (Suitability).

DEFINITIONS

13. The definitions below are used in this Decision Notice.

“the Act” means the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000;

“the Application” means the application referred to in paragraph 1 above;

“the Authority” means the Financial Conduct Authority;

“the Decision Notice” means the decision notice dated 11 May 2021 given to Safe Claims
by the Authority;

“the RDC” means the Authority’s Regulatory Decisions Committee;

“the RTC” means the Authority’s Regulatory Transactions Committee;

“SUP” means the Supervision section of the Authority’s handbook;

“SYSC” means the Senior Management Arrangements, Systems and Controls section of
the Authority’s handbook;

“the Tribunal” means the Upper Tribunal (Tax & Chancery Chamber); and

“the Warning Notice” means the warning notice dated 17 March 2021 given to Safe Claims
by the Authority.

FACTS AND MATTERS

14. The Application was received by the Authority on 31 May 2019.

15. Further information was requested from Safe Claims under section 55U(5) of the Act.

16. On 6 September 2019, the Authority sent an email to Safe Claims requesting that Safe
Claims provide the following information in support of the Application by 20 September
2019:


i.
Trading names information.

ii.
Client journey and consent information.

iii.
Financial resources information including:

i.
Worked calculation of how Safe Claims meets its Prudential Resources
Requirement;

ii.
Details of the assumptions underpinning Safe Claims’ cash flow and
profit/loss forecast figures; and

iii.
Details of Safe Claims’ revenue split per product/service.

iv.
Organisation chart.

v.
Referral Scheme information.

vi.
Answers to questions 5.11(d) and 5.17 in the Individual Form (TIF Form) which
is used to assess the appropriate resources and suitability in relation to
individuals responsible for the management of a CMC.

17. On 20 September 2019, Safe Claims responded to the Authority’s request for
information sent on 6 September 2019. Safe Claims provided all the information
requested at paragraphs 16(i) – (vi) above, apart from the information requested at
paragraph 16(v), namely a spreadsheet of all the referrals made over the last 6
months.


18. On 24 September 2019, the Authority requested that Safe Claims provide a
spreadsheet of all referrals made over the last 6 months. Safe Claims provided this
information on 24 September 2019.


19. On 26 September 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims requesting that it amend
its website in order to comply with the rules on financial promotions.


20. On 27 September 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims seeking to arrange a time
to discuss the Application. Safe Claims did not respond.


21. On 1 October 2019, the Authority sent an email to Safe Claims requesting that Safe
Claims provide the following information in support of the Application by 4 October
2019:


i.
SMCR supporting documentation; and

ii.
A Statement of Responsibilities.


22. On 16 October 2019, Safe Claims’ director called the Authority and stated that she had
been out of the office because she was receiving treatment for a medical condition. The
director provided the Authority with the name of an alternative member of staff to
speak to in her absence.

23. On 18 October 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims stating it needed to amend its
website as it did not comply with financial promotions rules.

24. On 19 November 2019, Safe Claims emailed the Authority stating the changes
requested by the Authority on 18 October 2019 had been made.


25. On 26 November 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims seeking to arrange a time
for the Authority to speak to Safe Claims. Safe Claims did not respond.


26. On 5 December 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims requesting amendments to
its website in order to comply with financial promotions rules and requested information
relating to Safe Claims’ business plan by 19 December 2019. This included information
on Safe Claims’ qualifications and experience to process mis-sold mortgage claims and
its plans on expanding to customers who speak Romanian, Bulgarian and Hungarian.
Safe Claims did not respond by the deadline.

27. On 20 December 2019, the Authority emailed Safe Claims requesting a response to the
request made on 5 December 2019 by 3 January 2020. Safe Claims did not respond by
the deadline.


28. On 10 January 2020, Safe Claims provided a response to the request made on 20
December 2019, however this response was not received on this date but was
forwarded on to the Authority on 5 March 2020.


29. On 28 January 2020, the Authority sent a letter to Safe Claims by email, noting the
lack of response to its previous information requests on 5 December 2019 and 20
December 2019 and informing Safe Claims that a failure to provide the information by
11 February 2020 would result in the Application being determined based upon the
information received to date and that might result in a recommendation to the RTC

that it give Safe Claims a Warning Notice proposing to refuse the Application. Safe
Claims failed to provide the information by 11 February 2020.


30. On 27 February 2020, the Authority sent a second letter to Safe Claims by email and
recorded delivery, noting the lack of response to its previous information requests on
5 December 2019 and 20 December 2019 and informing Safe Claims that a failure to
provide the information by 12 March 2020 would result in the Application being
determined based upon the information received to date and that might result in a
recommendation to the RTC that it give Safe Claims a Warning Notice proposing to
refuse the Application. Safe Claims was given ten business days to provide the
information requested. It had attempted to provide a response on 10 January 2020 but
the Authority received the response on 5 March 2020. Safe Claims stated that the
amendments to its website had been made in relation to financial promotions. Safe
Claims also provided some comments on its business plan with regards to its work on
mis-sold mortgage claims and expansion to customers who speak Romanian, Bulgarian
and Hungarian.


31. On 10 March 2020, the Authority sent a further email to Safe Claims stating its response
was not substantive. The Authority requested the following:


i.
further amendments to Safe Claims’ website in order to comply with financial
promotions rules;

ii.
further information in relation to Safe Claims’ work on mis-sold mortgage claims
in its business plan; and

iii.
SMCR supporting documentation and a Statement of Responsibilities.

32. On 13 March 2020, Safe Claims responded stating that the amendments to its website
had been completed and clarified its position on its work on mis-sold mortgage claims
in its business plan. Safe Claims stated that it would provide SMCR supporting
documentation and a Statement of Responsibilities in a separate email. The Authority
replied on the same day seeking confirmation by 27 March 2020 as to how it could be
satisfied going forwards that Safe Claims would respond promptly to the Authority’s
requests for information. Safe Claims did not respond by the deadline.

33. On 6 April 2020, the Authority emailed Safe Claims noting that Safe Claims had not
responded to its email dated 13 March 2020. The Authority requested that Safe Claims
contact the Authority by 11 April 2020.


34. On 19 June 2020, the Authority attempted to call Safe Claims but the call was not
answered and so the Authority sent a further email to Safe Claims noting that it had
still not responded to its email dated 13 March 2020. The Authority requested that Safe
Claims respond by 27 June 2020. Safe Claims did not respond to the email.


35. On 26 June 2020, the Authority attempted to call Safe Claims but the call was not
answered.


36. On 7 July 2020, the Authority attempted to call Safe Claims but the call was not
answered and a voicemail message was left asking Safe Claims to contact the Authority.


37. On 14 July 2020, the Authority sent a letter to Safe Claims by email and recorded
delivery, noting the lack of response to its previous information requests on 13 March
2020, 6 April 2020 and 19 June 2020 and informing Safe Claims that a failure to provide
the outstanding information by 28 July 2020 would result in the Application being
determined based upon the information received to date and that might result in a
recommendation to the RTC that it give Safe Claims a Warning Notice proposing to
refuse the Application.


38. Safe Claims failed to provide the outstanding information by 28 July 2020.


39. Between 25 November 2020 and 11 January 2021, the Authority attempted to contact
Safe Claims’ director to confirm that the director had recovered from the treatment
mentioned at paragraph 22 and that Safe Claims still intended to pursue the
Application. During this period, the Authority sent Safe Claims 7 emails and made 8
calls to ascertain this information. On 2 December 2020, the Authority managed to
contact Safe Claims’ director by telephone and on that call the director confirmed that
she was in good health and indicated that Safe Claims would look to withdraw the
Application due to issues with Safe Claims’ business. On 10 December 2020, Safe
Claims requested further guidance on winding down the business. Despite the Authority
providing this guidance, the Authority did not receive confirmation from Safe Claims as
to whether it would be progressing or withdrawing the Application. Safe Claims failed
to respond to four further attempted communications to confirm its position.


IMPACT ON THRESHOLD CONDITIONS

40. The regulatory provisions relevant to this Decision Notice are referred to in Annex A.

41. Safe Claims has failed to respond to 14 separate requests for the provision of
information considered by the Authority to be necessary to allow the Application to be
determined. The final request gave Safe Claims 10 business days to respond, and
included a statement to the effect that Safe Claims must contact the Authority, or the
Authority would recommend to the RTC that Safe Claims receives a Warning Notice.

42. The Authority has therefore determined the Application based upon the information
received to date, in circumstances where its requests for information have not been
met. Having reviewed that information, the Authority cannot ensure that Safe Claims
satisfies, and will continue to satisfy, the threshold conditions.

43. Authorised firms (and those seeking authorisation) are expected to engage with the
Authority in an open and cooperative way. The failure to provide the requested
information raises concerns that Safe Claims would fail to do so if the Application were
to be granted.

44. The failure to provide the information raises concerns as to whether Safe Claims:

a. can be effectively supervised by the Authority as required by threshold condition
2C;

b. has appropriate human resources, given Safe Claims’ failure to provide the
Authority with the requested information as required by threshold condition 2D;
and

c. will conduct its business with integrity and in compliance with proper standards
as required by threshold condition 2E.

IMPORTANT NOTICES

45. This Final Notice is given under section 390(1) of the Act.

46. Sections 391(4), 391(6) and 391(7) of the Act apply to the publication of information
about the matter to which this Notice relates. Under those provisions, the Authority
must publish such information about the matter to which this Notice relates as the
Authority considers appropriate. The information may be published in such manner as
the Authority considers appropriate. However, the Authority may not publish
information if such publication would, in the opinion of the Authority, be unfair to you
or prejudicial to the interests of consumers or detrimental to the stability of the UK
financial system.

47. The Authority intends to publish such information about the matter to which this Final
Notice relates as it considers appropriate.

Authority contacts

48. For more information concerning this matter generally, contact Tina Archer, Manager,
Claims Management Department at the Authority (direct line: 020 7066 9188 / email:
tina.archer@fca.org.uk).

Karen Avis
on behalf of the Regulatory Transactions Committee

ANNEX A – REGULATORY PROVISIONS RELEVANT TO THIS FINAL NOTICE

1. Section 55A(1) of the Act provides for an application for permission to carry on one or
more regulated activities to be made to the appropriate regulator. Section 55A(2) defines
the “appropriate regulator” for different applications.

2. Section 55B(3) of the Act provides that, in giving or varying permission, imposing or
varying a requirement, or giving consent, under any provision of Part 4A of the Act, each
regulator must ensure that the person concerned will satisfy, and continue to satisfy, in
relation to all of the regulated activities for which the person has or will have permission,
the threshold conditions for which that regulator is responsible.

3. The threshold conditions are set out in Schedule 6 of the Act. In brief, the threshold
conditions relate to:

(1)
Threshold condition 2B: Location of offices

(2)
Threshold condition 2C: Effective supervision

(3)
Threshold condition 2D: Appropriate resources

(4)
Threshold condition 2E: Suitability

(5)
Threshold condition 2F: Business model

Relevant provisions of the Authority’s Handbook

4. In exercising its powers in relation to the granting of a Part 4A permission, the Authority
must have regard to guidance published in the Authority’s Handbook, including the part
entitled Threshold Conditions (“COND”). The main considerations in relation to the action
specified are set out below.

5. COND 1.3.2G(2) states that, in relation to threshold conditions 2D to 2F, the Authority
will consider whether a firm is ready, willing and organised to comply on a continuing
basis with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system which will apply
to the firm if it is granted Part 4A permission.

6. COND 1.3.3AG provides that, in determining the weight to be given to any relevant
matter, the Authority will consider its significance in relation to the regulated activities
for which the firm has, or will have, permission in the context of its ability to supervise
the firm adequately, having regard to the Authority’s statutory objectives. In this context,
a series of matters may be significant when taken together, even though each of them
in isolation might not give serious cause for concern.

7. COND 1.3.3BG provides that, in determining whether the firm will satisfy, and continue
to satisfy, the Authority threshold conditions, the Authority will have regard to all relevant
matters, whether arising in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.

Threshold Condition 2C: Effective Supervision

8. COND 2.3.3G states that, in assessing the threshold condition set out in paragraph 2C of
Schedule 6 to the Act, factors which the Authority will take into consideration include,
among other things, whether it is likely that the Authority will receive adequate
information from the firm to determine whether it is complying with the requirements
and standards under the regulatory system for which the Authority is responsible and to
identify and assess the impact on its statutory objectives; this will include consideration
of whether the firm is ready, willing and organised to comply with Principle 11 (Relations
with regulators) and the rules in SUP on the provision of information to the Authority.

Threshold condition 2D: Appropriate Resources

9. COND 2.4.2G(2) states that the Authority will interpret the term 'appropriate' as meaning
sufficient in terms of quantity, quality and availability, and 'resources' as including all
financial resources (though only in the case of firms not carrying on, or seeking to carry
on, a PRA-regulated activity), non-financial resources and means of managing its
resources; for example, capital, provisions against liabilities, holdings of or access to cash
and other liquid assets, human resources and effective means by which to manage risks.

10. COND 2.4.2G(2A) provides that, ‘non-financial resources’ of the firm include human
resources it has available.

11. COND 2.4.2G(3) states that high level systems and control requirements are in SYSC.
The Authority will consider whether the firm is ready, willing and organised to comply
with these and other applicable systems and controls requirements when assessing if it
has appropriate non-financial resources for the purpose of the threshold conditions set
out in threshold condition 2D.

Threshold condition 2E: Suitability

12. COND 2.5.2G(2) states that the Authority will also take into consideration anything that
could influence a firm's continuing ability to satisfy the threshold conditions set out in
paragraphs 2E and 3D of Schedule 6 to the Act. Examples include the firm's position
within a UK or international group, information provided by overseas regulators about
the firm, and the firm's plans to seek to vary its Part 4A permission to carry on additional
regulated activities once it has been granted that permission.

13. COND 2.5.4G(2)(a) states that examples of the kind of general considerations to which
the Authority may have regard when assessing whether a firm will satisfy, and continue
to satisfy, threshold condition 2E include, but are not limited to, whether the firm can
demonstrate that it conducts, or will conduct, its business with integrity and in compliance
with proper standards.

14. COND 2.5.6G provides that examples of the kind of particular considerations to which the
Authority may have regard when assessing whether a firm will satisfy, and continue to
satisfy, this threshold condition include, but are not limited to, whether the firm has been
open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority and any other regulatory body
(see Principle 11 (Relations with regulators)) and is ready, willing and organised to
comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system (such as the
detailed requirements of SYSC and, in relation to a firm not carrying on, or seeking to
carry on, a PRA-regulated activity only, the Prudential Standards part of the Authority’s
Handbook) in addition to other legal, regulatory and professional obligations; the relevant
requirements and standards will depend on the circumstances of each case, including the
regulated activities which the firm has permission, or is seeking permission, to carry on.