FSA bans two insurance brokers for misconduct
The Financial Services Authority has banned two insurance brokers, Andrew Porter and Alexander Brincat, from working in the financial services industry.

It has also withdrawn the permissions of Brincat’s insurance firm - Wise Owl Services Limited.
Porter was the sole shareholder and the only broker at Porter Insurance which specialised in providing insurance policies for businesses and individuals.
The FSA found that while a broker and director of Porter Insurance Andrew Porter had deliberately underinsured clients, retaining the surplus money for his benefit and exposed companies to the risk of significant financial loss by misleading them into paying for cover, which, unknown to them, was neither suitable nor appropriate for their business needs, leading them to be underinsured.
He also falsified documentation in the names of companies to mislead those clients and recipient insurance companies.
The FSA considers Porter’s dishonest conduct to be serious because he abused the trust and confidence his clients and recipient insurance companies placed upon him, exposing the clients to significant financial losses. He posed a risk both to consumers and to insurance companies, and to confidence in the financial system.
Brincat was the sole director and a shareholder of Wise Owl, a small firm specialising in insurance policies for buildings and life insurance.
The FSA found that between September 2009 and August 2010 Alexander Brincat had failed to monitor adequately the high cancellation rate of life insurance policies sold by Wise Owl, and failed to disclose to Wise Owl’s insurance providers that it had a sales strategy of offering free life cover to customers.
He left the country for prolonged periods without putting in place adequate compliance arrangements at Wise Owl and failed to ensure that Wise Owl had sufficient resources to pay premiums due to customers who had agreed to the free life cover offered by Wise Owl, and repay sums of commission claw back owed to insurance providers when such cover was cancelled.
He also failed to monitor Wise Owl’s financial position, including the extent of Wise Owl’s liabilities to insurance providers.
Brincat’s failings are serious due to the significant losses incurred by Wise Owl’s insurance providers, and his abandonment of the authorised business. The FSA has therefore decided to ban him from performing any function in relation to any regulated activity.
Tracey McDermott, acting director of enforcement and financial crime commenting on both cases, says: “Andrew Porter deliberately underinsured clients, many of whom were involved in high risk trades. He provided them with policies he knew were potentially worthless and would not payout if they suffered an accident. This is not only a dishonest and deliberate failing in his responsibility as an approved person, but a complete breach of trust with his clients.”
She adds: “Alexander Brincat’s incompetence at Wise Owl posed a risk to other market participants and to confidence in the financial system. In order to remove this risk Brincat has been banned. We will continue to take action against individuals who, either through incompetence or fraudulent activity, allow their firms to cause such losses to other market participants.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Mortgage Strategy and Follow @mortgagestrat










Readers' comments (5)
IAN WINDSOR-SMITH | 5 Jul 2011 11:05 am
When if ever are institutions going to be exposed to the same intense investigations as the smaller easy target IFA's? Whilst the dishonesty and corruption at any level cannot be supported, is it not from the top down? as opposed to the bottom up?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Luke Atkinson | 5 Jul 2011 1:49 pm
Albeit there is no excusing what these two individuals have done and the FSA clearly have no other options than to strike them off but the same old question arises.
Are the FSA, considering the actions taken against these individuals, now going to start proceedings against the board of directors of the banks that clearly instructed their branch staff to mis sell PPI policies and defraud consumers out of millions of pounds of premiums knowing full well the policies were worthless?
This is complete hypocrisy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Simon | 5 Jul 2011 3:59 pm
What baffles me is the way that comments on these threads always turn to how bad the FSA is or how evil the banks are.
Yes, granted that the above have issues that are addressed in great depth during pretty much article, however, is it not also right that IFA's like Brincat deserve to be named and shamed?!
Other than the lip service paid via the, 'I'm not saying they weren't wrong but...' crowd are their any IFA's out there that are looking in the right direction regarding this topic and calling this man out for what he is?
Is everyone too busy focusing on the 'Evil Empire' to actually realise that people like this are the reason for lack of faith in IFA's?
How about, at least on this one occassion, you point your anger in the right direction!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Phil Shelford | 5 Jul 2011 5:00 pm
I agree with Simon. The fact that banks also hard sell is irrelevant to the disqualification of this pair. I think any individual who deceives either the clients or the financial institutions should be struck off. I want faith restored in my industry so that not only he public but also the banks etc want our business.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Martin Tapper | 6 Jul 2011 9:16 am
Luke Atkinson is right. Whether committed by a one-man-band or by a bank. There is one law and it states that FRAUD IS ILLEGAL, however we all should remember that some frauds are less illegal than others, depending on whether committed by a man or a pig. (see "1984" by George Orwell)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment