Upper Tribunal confirms Odey industry ban: all five FCA allegations upheld, fine cut to £1.53m
The ban stands. The Tribunal found he dismantled his own firm's governance to escape accountability. For firms with owner-managers in senior manager functions, the mechanism is as instructive as the misconduct.
Listen on Spotify
Add The Perimeter Report to Claude
Verdict: worth reviewing if you hold Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SM&CR) responsibilities. Routine if not.
The Upper Tribunal has upheld the FCA's ban on Crispin Odey, finding he lacked integrity across all five allegations brought against him. The fine was trimmed from the FCA's proposed £1.83m to £1.53m after the Tribunal declined to apply the aggravating-factor uplift the regulator had built into its calculation, but the prohibition itself stands in full.
The governance mechanism here is the point, not just the underlying misconduct. An owner-manager used his ownership power to dismantle the firm's internal oversight body twice over, specifically to prevent it reaching a conclusion he disliked. Under SM&CR, that kind of obstruction sits squarely in scope. If your firm has a controlling shareholder who also holds a senior manager function, this case is a concrete illustration of how that structural tension can play out.
Odey, founder and majority owner of Odey Asset Management (OAM), faced an internal disciplinary process for breaching a final written warning relating to repeated and persistent inappropriate behaviour towards female employees. Rather than engage with the process, he bullied and threatened his executive directors, then twice dismissed OAM's executive committee (ExCo) when they refused to yield to that pressure, stopping the disciplinary process dead. The Tribunal found his justifications for removing the ExCos were no more than a smokescreen, and that he considered himself to have free rein to conduct himself with female staff according to his own impaired judgement.
The Tribunal also upheld allegations that his dealings with OAM, its clients, its investors, and the FCA lacked candour. That includes making false assertions to FCA staff and threatening them directly.
He demonstrated no insight into why his conduct lacked integrity, expressed no contrition, and wrongly considered himself the victim. In multiple respects, the Tribunal found his evidence lacked credibility.
The FCA's executive director of enforcement and market oversight was direct: 'That arrogant entitlement and the resulting complete disregard for proper governance means Mr Odey is unfit to work in financial services.'
Sources
- Upper tribunal upholds crispin odey banfca.org.uk
