orangeblock

Rob Spendley reinstated: The cost of suspension while innocent

13 August 2008 | People and Companies | News | Rob Spendley, Rosspen Financial Services CC

On Monday the 11th August the Registrar for Financial Services, reinstated the licence of Rosspen Financial Services CC as well as the key individual Rob Spendley.

The re-instatement effectively exonerates Spendley from any wrongdoing in the Le Vatte case and clearly indicates that he and his company do indeed meet the Fit and Proper Requirements of Honesty and Integrity as required by the FAIS Act.

In 2005 a Mr & Mrs Le Vatte laid a complaint against Spendley when he invoiced then for services rendered and they refused to pay. This subsequently lead to Spendley taking legal action to recover the outstanding amount, at which point the Le Vattes complained to the Ombud who, after his own investigation made a determination that Spendley could not charge fees. In this determination the Ombud, Charles Pillai, included a 30 page diatribe reviling Spendley as incompetent, cavalier and ‘hell bent on selling policies whether there was a need or not”.

Spendley, who was the vice president of LUASA at the time turned to the organization for assistance to prove his innocence by way of inter alia and internal disciplinary hearing. The Board of Luasa summarily dismissed this request and issued a press statement stating that Spendley had been “found guilty of fraud” (Even though in the Ombuds findings he states expressly that “there was no finding of fraud”) and that he was guilty of “not informing them of his precarious position”.

The Ombud refused Spendley the opportunity of a hearing, something that Spendley demanded from the beginning, before he made his determination, he also refused Spendley leave to appeal the decision, as did the chairman of the appeals board. The Ombud recommended that the FSB investigate Spendley as he had made several allegations of Spendley’s not being fit and proper.

The FSB duly wrote to Spendley informing him of their intention to withdraw his licence early in 2006 based on information provided by the Ombud. Spendley once again demanded a hearing and was again refused however on pointing out a number if incorrect conclusions in the FSB (Registrar’s) reasons to withdraw the licence, the Registrar decided to investigate further.

After almost two years the registrar finally decided that on the balance of the evidence and witness statements before him, he would withdraw Spendley’s company’s licence to act as a financial services provider. Spendley immediately appealed this decision and finally an appeal date was set for the beginning of 2008. This date was subsequently postponed to the 04 September 2008. Spendley would finally get the hearing he had been seeking since 2005.

During the week 04 – 08 August, during their preparations for the appeal, one of the witnesses that the fsb was to rely on to prove Spendley’s inherent dishonesty suddenly, when faced with testifying under oath, broke down and admitted to have committed fraud at Rosspen before she was subsequently dismissed from the company for dishonesty. This was in line with statements made by Spendley from the start of the Ombud’s investigation.

On Friday the 08 August the FSB contacted Spendley requesting that he travel to Pretoria to discuss the matter of reinstating his licence and on Monday the 11th August 2008 said licence was reinstated (see letter from Registrar).

Mr Spendley, his company and business partners have suffered huge financial losses due to the Ombud’s verbose determination and publication thereof as well as the Registrars original decision to withdraw his licence. Part of the instruction to Spendley on withdrawal of his licence was
(1) that he had to transfer his entire client base to other brokers and
(2) he had to dispose of his short term client base and
(3) to stop practicing.

The reinstatement of the license therefore exonerates Spendley and his company Rosspen Financial Services from any wrongdoing, but does not in any way address the matter of a 15 year old brokerage that was summarily closed down by the decision to withdraw the licence in the first place. Almost a year has past since the license was withdrawn and Spendley instructed to dispose of his client base of fifteen years.

Rob Spendley intends to write a series of articles entitled “Your Brokerage – hanging by a thread” detailing the dangers of how you can be summarily wiped out by the Ombud and the Registrar and even if after appeal you are found to be innocent and your licence may have been mistakenly withdrawn, you have no recourse for compensation of loss of earnings of any kind from the FSB. In addition he will write a article entitled “LUASA – the art of being useless and defamatory” detailing why this long standing intermediary organization has spiralled into an abyss of uselessness that is drawing fees from it’s members whilst providing little to no benefit for the fees (apart from a benefit to the highly paid CEO and senior staff that is)

Rob Spendley would like to acknowledge that support and faith shown in him by his attorney, clients, consultants and friends during this harrowing time.

Comments

Added by Lourens, 14 Aug 2008
This case proves once again that there is a very real need for an association that is able to support and fight for members rights when they are faced with challenges such as this. Currently there is no association that is able or willing to do this. I think it is time for us to organise such an association that can ensure that our rights are protected and that we as financial planners are no longer bullied by arrogant institutions and partial bullies who seek to serve their own ego's at the cost of intermediaries, clients and the industry. Come on lets stand together, let us organise ourselves and forge an association. I am willing to serve, are you?
Report Abuse
Added by ladyboff, 14 Aug 2008
How tragic that 15 year's work can be obliterated by lies and summations. Mr Spendley is very courageous - thank goodness he didn't fold under the pressure but at what cost? We wish him well and trust that he will be able to practice once more without worry of being wiped out once again.
Report Abuse
Added by Hansie Louw, 12 Aug 2008
This is shocking! I wrongfully assumed that Spendley was guilty as this was how the media portrayed it (not th fault of the media, I think - but as a result of not giving Spendley a chance to defend himself). LUASA to me seems pretty useless and I do not even want to talk about the FSB (remember Fidentia?). The question now is - how do we reimburse Spendley? How will LUASA and the FSB ask forgiveness and award restitution?
Report Abuse
Added by old wallet, 12 Aug 2008
Mr Spendley, I applaud you for the courage and the conviction to persist with your endeavours to set the record straight. Many that know / knew you may have passed untoward comments; what's that about throwing stones? HOWEVER THE MOST PRESSING THOUGHT IS; - CAN A PERSON CONTINUE TO ACCEPT THE OMBUD'S RULINGS IN GOD FAITH? Oh dear, what do we do as intermediateries? The office of the Ombud can no longer be viewed as the 'independent, unbiased’ authority looking after the FAIS industry. Will the client be properly cared for? Will parties continue to be denied the right to defend themselves? Why should you have to pay the FSB the R1000.00 case fee? You pay your levies. With the apparent manner the respondent went about doing their impartial job, it should apply to Hallmark to air a series. As I said before, until the intermediateries combine under one body, we will not be able to a cohesive force and will not get the recognition we deserve!
Report Abuse

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

quick poll
Question

If you had to hazard a guess, when do you reckon the COFI Bill will be signed into law?

Answer