UT/2023/000092 - [2024] UKUT 00035 (TCC)

In the Authority’s submission prejudice would arise as follows if the new business requirement were suspended thus allowing Nvayo to transact with new customers. Firstly, allowing business to resume without any restriction would undermine the statutory scheme. That required those holding qualifying holdings to be fit and proper. Secondly, given the imminent withdrawal of Nvayo’s banking facilities, new customers would suffer prejudice if they paid money to a firm who would shortly have to reimburse them unless the firm could obtain new banking facilities. Thirdly, Nvayo’s lack of robust AML procedures prejudices the public at large and the integrity of the payment system.

Nvayo disagree that any of the above issues present a significant risk. Regarding Mr Scanlon being Nvayo’s UBO and the charges against him, Mr Scanlon is presumed innocent. The charges against him did not concern his conduct as regards Nvayo, and in any case could well be dropped. He has since May 2023 played no management role with Nvayo, his access to Nvayo’s systems was stopped, and a sale of his interest is in prospect. The issue with the safeguarding bank account only arose in the first place because of the Authority’s actions. Nvayo is confident they can resolve matters with the Bank given any issue the Bank has with Mr Scanlon being the UBO will be addressed when his interest is sold. The AML remediation has been put in place, and the issues the Authority have raised with the client file review were not fundamental as the Authority maintain but administrative in nature. There is no reason why with a Skilled Person (whose appointment is anticipated to be agreed shortly) in place why Nvayo should not continue to take on new business.