The FCA alleges Crispin Odey breached Individual Conduct Rule 1 by acting without integrity, deliberately frustrating disciplinary processes into sexual harassment allegations, showing reckless disregard for governance, and causing Odey Asset Management LLP to breach regulatory obligations. According to the FCA, Odey dismissed members of OAM's executive committee investigating the incident, leaving himself its sole member and postponing the disciplinary process indefinitely. On Christmas Eve 2021, Crispin Odey fired letters sacking his hedge fund's executives and stopping them from investigating sexual harassment allegations against him, according to research from five sources. This disagreement over whether Odey deliberately frustrated the investigation is central to the tribunal case, as it determines whether his actions constituted misconduct warranting the FCA's fine and ban, with Odey denying deliberately attempting to frustrate the investigation and claiming he tried to have the FCA rule on his fitness first.
A report by law firm Simmons & Simmons in January 2021 found at least 46 historical allegations of inappropriate conduct by Crispin Odey towards female employees between 2003 and 2020, FCA lawyers told the Upper Tribunal. The specific evidence the FCA has beyond this report to support the 46 historical allegations remains unknown, adding complexity to the tribunal's assessment. Crispin Odey claims the FCA had a hostile animus towards him, pre-judged the outcome, and targeted him as part of an agenda to focus on non-financial misconduct. In an official statement, Odey said he believed he became a poster boy for the authority's agenda and was the victim of a campaign by the authority to achieve his removal, and he added that he dismissed the committee members because they had been placed in an impossible position by the FCA's investigations into the allegations, stating he could not then, and cannot now, see what other option he had.
The threat to close the firm was an abject abuse of your power to coerce its governing body.
The tribunal heard that Crispin Odey threatened to close Odey Asset Management to pressure its governing body and if he was dismissed following any disciplinary process he considered unfair. Clare Sibson KC, a lawyer for the FCA, told the tribunal that the threat to close the firm was an abject abuse of his power to coerce its governing body, and she also said he was bullying his own ExCo not to put in measures to protect women. The court heard that the executive committee considered safeguarding measures to protect female staff, including a suggestion that Crispin Odey work in the office's basement, with Odey describing the idea as having to stay in dungeons, according to a press conference. Clare Sibson KC further questioned Odey's awareness, asking if he struggled to recognise the consequences of his actions on other people and if he thought he was also hypersensitive to insults against himself, to which Odey replied, 'Nope.'
The FCA has explicitly stated that firms must prioritize non-financial misconduct, viewing it as a critical indicator of organizational health and a potential precursor to wider harms. City firms will be probed by the FCA on how they deal with reports of workplace sexual harassment and bullying, including the use of NDAs, after a steady increase in whistleblowing reports, according to the FCA via Sarah Pritchard. The FCA aims to finish its investigation into non-financial misconduct by summer, but it is not clear if or when findings will be made public, based on research from five sources. Existing FCA measures do not require firms to admit to using NDAs to deal with misconduct, and there could be valid reasons for using them, according to the FCA via Sarah Pritchard and Nikhil Rathi.
There were no allegations over this period of time.
According to www.cityam.com, Eleanor Rowswell described current practice among financial services firms on addressing non-financial misconduct as very mixed, and clarity on requirements is important. According to www.cityam.com, Robin Henry described the FCA as likely responding to pressure from Parliament and the community to take non-financial misconduct more seriously. The outcome of the tribunal hearing and whether Crispin Odey's challenge will succeed remains unknown, as does how many other firms are under investigation by the FCA for non-financial misconduct and the details of those cases. The full contents of the FCA's upcoming report on non-financial misconduct and whether it will be made public are also uncertain, along with the impact of Odey's case on broader regulatory practices and firm compliance with non-financial misconduct rules.
You were bullying your own ExCo not to put in measures to protect women.
Why would they do that if there were no allegations?
Crispin Odey is said to have described the idea of working in the basement as 'having to stay in dungeons'.
You appear to struggle to recognise the consequences of your actions on other people. Do you think you are also hypersensitive to insults against yourself?
Nope.
I believed I became 'a poster boy for the authority's agenda' and was the victim of 'a campaign by the authority to achieve my removal'.
I dismissed the committee members because they had been placed in an 'impossible position' by the FCA's investigations into the allegations.
I could not then, and cannot now, see what other option I had.
I do not remember cornering a female employee after a boozy lunch and saying 'I could attack you now', as recorded in her diary.
I admitted to groping a female colleague's breasts without her consent in 2005, blaming it on being under sedatives after a root canal.
Current practice among financial services firms on addressing non-financial misconduct is very mixed, and clarity on requirements is important.
The FCA is likely responding to pressure from Parliament and the community to take non-financial misconduct more seriously.