FINAL NOTICE

ACTION

1.
For the reasons set out in this Final Notice, the Authority hereby takes the
following action against Savatori Oliverio.

2.
The Authority gave Savatori Oliverio the Decision Notice, which notified Savatori
Oliverio that, for the reasons given below and pursuant to section 56 of the Act,
the Authority had decided to make an order prohibiting Savatori Oliverio from
performing any function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by any
authorised person, exempt person or exempt professional firm.

3.
Savatori Oliverio has not referred the matter to the Tribunal within 28 days of the
date on which the Decision Notice was given to him.

4.
Accordingly, for the reasons set out below, the Authority hereby makes an order
pursuant to section 56 of the Act prohibiting Savatori Oliverio from performing
any function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by an authorised

person, exempt person or exempt professional firm. The Prohibition Order takes
effect from 28 August 2019.

DEFINITIONS

5.
The definitions below are used in this Final Notice (and in the Annex):

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

“the Authority” means the Financial Conduct Authority;

“the Firm” means Tunstall Trade Car Sales Limited the authorised and regulated
firm where Mr Oliverio works;

“the Decision Notice” means the Decision Notice given to Mr Oliverio dated 12
June 2019;

“EG” means the Enforcement Guide;

“FIT” means the Fit and Proper Test for Approved Persons and specified

significant-harm functions sourcebook;

“the Handbook” means the Authority’s Handbook of rules and guidance;

“the Prohibition Order” means the order prohibiting Mr Oliverio, pursuant to
section 56 of the Act, from performing any function in relation to any regulated
activity carried on by an authorised person, exempt person or exempt
professional firm;

“Savatori Oliverio” means Savatori Leonard Oliverio;

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

“the Warning Notice” means the warning notice given to Mr Oliverio dated 23 May
2019.

RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS

6.
The statutory and regulatory provisions relevant to this Final Notice are set out in
the Annex.

SUMMARY OF REASONS

7.
The Authority has concluded, on the basis of the facts and matters and
conclusions described in the Warning Notice, and in the Decision Notice, that
Savatori Oliverio is not a fit and proper person to perform any function in relation
to any regulated activity carried on by any authorised person, exempt person or
exempt professional firm, as his conduct has demonstrated a serious lack of
honesty and integrity. Specifically, Savatori Oliverio was convicted, upon his own
confession, on 25 October 2017 at Stoke on Trent Crown Count, of 1 count of
“Conspire to Defraud” and 1 count of “Conspiracy to Apply False Trade Marks”
contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977.

8.
On 9 January 2018, Savatori Oliverio was sentenced to a total of 12 months’
imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, concurrent on each count, and unpaid
work of 120 hours.

9.
In reaching this decision, the Authority has had regard to all relevant
circumstances, including the relevance and materiality of the offences, the
severity of the risk posed by Savatori Oliverio to consumers and financial
institutions and to confidence in the market generally. The Authority considers
that it is appropriate to impose the prohibition order proposed in paragraph 1 to
achieve its consumer protection and integrity objectives (sections 1C and 1D of
the Act, respectively).

FACTS AND MATTERS RELIED ON

10.
On 25 October 2017, Savatori Oliverio was convicted at Stoke on Trent Crown
Court of the offences referred to above at paragraph 7.

11.
On 9 January 2018, Savatori Oliverio was sentenced at Stoke on Trent Crown
Court to 12 months imprisonment suspended for 18 months and unpaid work of
120 hours for each of the offences summarised at paragraph 7.

12.
Although Savatori Oliverio is not, and has never been, an approved person, he is
currently the sole director of the Firm, and has been since 1 December 2017.

13.
Savatori Oliverio’s father ran a second-hand car sales business through the Firm.
The vehicles were advertised in auto trading publications with false service
histories. This made the vehicles more attractive to customers and secondly
increased their value because they were sold as having full service histories,
including vehicles that did not have a service history at all. The vehicles were sold
with falsely created and falsely provided documents including service books in
which trade marks were used again without the consent of the proprietors of the
trade marks, with a view to making a gain.

14.
In his sentencing remarks (made on 9 January 2018), the sentencing Judge
stated that the fraud was carried out with some “significant planning” and
“sophistication”. The harm caused was valued at £120,000. In respect of
culpability, the Judge accepted that Savatori Oliverio had “limited culpability” and
there were “very clear degrees of responsibility and degrees of control”
particularly in the case of the conspiracy offence which was led by Savatori
Oliverio’s father. However, the Judge stated that although Savatori Oliverio may
have been influenced by his father in committing the offences, he was not
pressurised to do so.

15.
Through the Warning Notice, the Authority gave notice that it proposed to take
the action described above and Savatori Oliverio was given the opportunity to
make representations to the Authority about that proposed action.

16.
No representations have been received by the Authority from Savatori Oliverio
within the time allowed by the Warning Notice, the default procedures in DEPP
2.3.2G of the Authority’s Decision Procedure and Penalties manual permit the
allegations/matters described in the Warning Notice, and repeated in the Decision
Notice, to be regarded as undisputed.

17.
The Authority has therefore decided to prohibit Savatori Oliverio from performing
any function in relation to any regulated activity carried on by an authorised
person, exempt person or exempt professional firm.

Decision Maker

18.
The decision which gave rise to the obligation to give this Final Notice was made
by the Regulatory Decisions Committee.

Important

19.
This Final Notice is given to Savatori Oliverio in accordance with section 390(1) of
the Act.

20.
The Authority must publish such information about the matter to which this Final
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 Savatori Oliverio or prejudicial to the interests of
consumers.

21.
The Authority intends to publish this Final Notice and such information about the
matter to which this Final Notice relates as it considers appropriate.

Authority Contacts

22.
For more information concerning this matter generally, Savatori Oliverio should
contact Hema Rachhoya at the Authority (direct line: 020 7066 2770).

Anna Couzens
Enforcement and Market Oversight


ANNEX

RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS

1.
The Authority’s operational objectives include securing an appropriate degree of
protection for consumers (section 1C of the Act) and protecting and enhancing
the integrity of the UK financial system (section 1D of the Act).

2.
Section 56(1) of the Act provides:

“The [Authority] may make a prohibition order if it appears to it that an individual
is not a fit and proper person to perform functions in relation to a regulated
activity carried on by:

(a)
an authorised person,

(b)
a person who is an exempt person in relation to that activity, or

(c)
a person to whom, as a result of Part 20, the general prohibition does not

apply in relation to that activity.”

RELEVANT REGULATORY PROVISIONS

3.
In exercising its power to make a prohibition order, the Authority must have
regard to guidance published in the Handbook and in regulatory guides, such as
EG. The relevant main considerations in relation to the action specified above are
set out below.

The Enforcement Guide

4.
The Authority’s policy in relation to exercising its power to issue a prohibition
order is set out in EG.

5.
EG 9.1 explains the purpose of prohibition orders in relation to the Authority’s
regulatory objectives.

6.
EG 9.2 sets out the Authority’s general policy on making prohibition orders. In
particular—

(a)
EG 9.2.1 states that the Authority will consider all relevant
circumstances, including whether enforcement action has been
taken against the individual by other enforcement agencies, in
deciding whether to make a prohibition order;

(b)
EG 9.2.2 states that the Authority has the power to make a range
of prohibition orders depending on the circumstances of each case;
and

(c)
EG 9.2.3 states that the scope of a prohibition order will depend
on, among other things, the reasons why the individual is not fit
and proper and the severity of risk he poses to consumers or the
market generally.

7.
EG 9.5.1 states that where the Authority is considering whether to make a
prohibition order against someone who is not an approved person, the Authority
will consider the severity of the risk posed by the individual and may prohibit him
where it considers that it is appropriate to achieve one or more of the Authority’s
statutory objectives.

8.
EG 9.5.2 provides that, when considering whether to exercise its power to make a
prohibition order against someone who is not an approved person, the Authority
will consider all the relevant circumstances of the case. These may include, but
are not limited to, the factors set out in EG 9.3.2. Those factors include: whether
the individual is fit and proper to perform functions in relation to regulated
activities (noting the criteria set out in FIT 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3); the relevance and
materiality of any matters indicating unfitness; the length of time since the
occurrence of any matters indicating unfitness; and the severity of the risk which
the individual poses to consumers and to confidence in the financial system.

Fit and Proper Test for Employees and Senior Personnel/or Approved Persons?

9.
The Authority has issued guidance on the fitness and propriety of individuals in
FIT.

10.
FIT 1.3.1BG(1) states that the most important considerations when assessing the
fitness and propriety of a person to perform a controlled function include that
person’s honesty, integrity and reputation.

11.
FIT 2.1.1G states that in determining a person’s honesty, integrity and
reputation, the Authority will have regard to all relevant matters including, but
not limited to, those set out in FIT 2.1.3G. It notes, amongst other things and by
way of example, that:

“… conviction for a criminal offence will not automatically mean an application will
be rejected. The [Authority] treats each candidate’s application on a case-by-case
basis, taking into account the seriousness of, and circumstances surrounding, the
offence, the explanation offered by the convicted person, the relevance of the
offence to the proposed role, the passage of time since the offence was
committed and evidence of the individual’s rehabilitation.”

12.
FIT 2.1.3G(1) states that the matters referred to in FIT 2.1.1G include, but are
not limited to, whether a person has been convicted of any criminal offence,
noting that particular consideration will be given to offences including
dishonesty, fraud and financial crime (amongst other things).