Two questions of legality ... (morality?)

1. Received this today:

"If you work in London or have access to <various systems> then in
addition to the existing preclearance regime, the new SEC rules
require that you (and any connected persons):

a:inform compliance of your investments in a very wide range of
instruments including shares, corporate bonds, unit trusts, OEICS and
Gilts whether held direct or in PEPs or ISAs.

b:each quarter confirm that you have reported transactions in these
investments to Compliance.(This will be done electronically as far as
possible and must include nil returns)

c:annually confirm that you have abided by the Code and confirm your
current holdings in these investments.

These new requirements may seem onerous, if not excessive and we
apologise for any inconvenience they cause.

They are however required of all US registered Investment Advisors.

We have tried to restrict their application as much as possible and to
make it as easy for you to comply with them."

Can they actually enforce this?

2. My poor wee niece, who's recovering from a liver transplant (big up
for the Royal Free Hospital) at the moment, is obliged to ring into
work *every* day, to tell them that she's not coming in. They even
rang in on the day of her operation, because she hadn't 'phoned by
noon. Duty sister gave them a piece of her mind, apparently.

Does this sound "right"? It doesn't to me.

 

Can you rephrase that, without all the complicated words?

Ummm... I /think/ it depends on her contract.

Has she sent them a sick note[0]?

 

FFS, they sound like a right bunch of cunts.

I suggest that you, or another member of the family, ring up the company
concerned (whoever she normally reports directly to, would be a good start
point - and if you get no joy with them, ask to speak to their boss etc.),
and inform them the likely timescale she's going to be off (I'd assume it
isn't exactly going to be a back to work next week scenario), and ask that
they leave her be to convalesce (sp?), in the peace and quiet she almost
certainly deserves.

A doctors note or whatever the equivalent is, in hospital terms, might help,
too.

 

I'd say "No" as it's American law and not UK law. Mind you, they could
make your life difficult if you don't comply. See a Union bod or speak
with the CAB.

Get your niece to tell them to "**** off" and let them know that she'll
give them a sick note.

Inconsiderate wankers.

 

Salad Dodger secured a place in history by writing:

Absolute cunts. They can insist on this in her contract, but only a
clueless moron would follow it to the letter. And if they dismissed her
for failure, I think an employment tribunal would take a very dim view of
it.......

Does she want to keep the job? The tabloids would love it.....

 

Prima facie I cannot see how American legislation can be enforced here.
If I was you I would check to see if the FSA has agreed any reciprocal
arrangements which may be enforceable. In addition I would make a
careful check to see if you are caught via the US registration aspect
mentioned above. It is possible you are required to comply if you are
registered but whether there would be immediate consequences for any
failure on your part I don't know. The Yanks could always ask for your
extradition if they felt that Share Dodger had been up to naughty things
at work.

It sounds bloody outrageous from where I am sitting. Assuming that she
told her employers of her absence if this was a planned operation then
they should accept her word / doctor's note. She does have an
obligation to provide some form of official notification with respect to
sick pay provisions.

If it was the result of an accident or emergency then I'd get the
consultant / hospital to make the appropriate call / send the necessary
evidence on her behalf. Oh and then I'd fire bomb her employer's
offices - heartless is not the word.

 

Are they looking for an excuse to sack her? If so, I'd have
thought it would rebound on them, as it sounds like harassment.

FWIW I think my friend who had a liver transplant left hospital
(IIRC) about 3 weeks later, but the doctors said she'd recovered
remarkably quickly.


--
<8P Wizard
Suzuki GS550 "I like that. Nicely shite" - TOG
Golf GTi 16v
ANORAK#17b BOMB#19 BOTAFOT#138 BREast#5 COFF#24
COSOC#8 DFV#11 STG#1
Remove location from email address to reply

 

Salad Dodger says...

I think so yes, as your company is registered with the SEC so has to
obey its rules no matter how daft.

I can ask our compliance officer tomorrow if you want.

 

Salad Dodger was seen penning the following ode to ... whatever:

The company probably can't really enforce it, but compliance to US law
will be enforced on *them* if they're headquartered in the US, thus
the requirements. Although they seem to be a little OTT - at least in
my place of work I *think* I've only got to clear and report share
purchases, not purchases in entities like unit trusts where I don't
have a say over the shares etc purchased.

Apart from it sounding like they are a right shower of boat anchors I
don't think there's a requirement that she has to phone home every day
as long as she's got a doctor's sick note. I don't think there is any
obligation for her to phone in if it's clear why and how long she's
off, especially if she can be easily found in the hospital.

I mean, FFS it's a bit more than appendix surgery...

 

Heh - you're very amusing when you get het up, you know.

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Salad Dodger

Certainly doesn't to me. Ffs, it's not as if she's swinging the lead,
and the utter bastards should realise that.

"Liver transplant, eh? Heard _that_ one before."

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

I think the point is it's probably a requirement for any finance company
trading in the US, in order to remain compliant with US laws post S-O,
and all that nonsense.. I suspect Dodgers little firm probably does
trade in the US, so has to comply.

We've had twelvety million and one new audit wastes of time introduced
over the past few months for similar reasons.

 

Bear wrote

Local paper why? Pratts own fault innit, needs a better fucking lawyer.
The minute the legal team arrived they should've got the doc to certify
sickness/unfitness. This not only overrides any contractual obligations
you may have with others but also opens up a really useful avenue of
opportunity to sue the **** off the quack later.

 

Bah. Try complying with the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act in *eek*
amount of time.

 

Because the legislation applies to a U.S. Registered Investment
Advisor. Without compliance, you don't get registered.

 

sweller's the man for this.

 

Salad Dodger wrote:
[snip]

it's your basic Sabannes-Oxley, innit, guvnor.

depends on what you mean by "enforce". They probably can't /legally/
make you do it, but /contractually/ you'll probably find you're already
obliged to follow any such rules that your /employer/ is legally bound
(albeit in the US) to follow.

 

I should hope so, as there is no such thing as 'UK law'.

 

Oh I can do comedy alongside promises of death and destruction. It's fun
watching people's laughs turn to abject fear and worry in the space of a
few moments.

 

But I assume they are registered already and are attempting to get by
with the minimum effort to demonstrate compliance. Dodger's point was
whether *enforcement* could be achieved here. Personally, and I'm far
from an expert compared to all you chaps working for yankee businesses,
I still struggle to see how enforcement action could be legally achieved
with a UK business subject to UK law. Surely the US authorities would
simply remove the registration which is not the same, in my book, as
enforcing the aspects of US legislation.