Latest news with #FSCA
IOL News
5 days ago
- Business
- IOL News
FSCA provisionally withdraws licence of Nessfin Investments
The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has provisionally withdrawn the licence of Nessfin Investments Ltd. Image: File The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has provisionally withdrawn the licence of Nessfin Investments Ltd and Finance Group (Pty). The company is no longer authorised to conduct financial services. This comes following concerns about its involvement with an unauthorised financial services provider operating in the crypto asset sector. Nessfin was authorised to offer a limited range of financial services related to crypto assets. However, in August 2024, the FSCA discovered that Nessfin was in possession and control of funds collected by My Wealth Legatus (Pty) Ltd (Legatus), a company not authorised by the FSCA and under investigation for conducting unregistered financial services. The FSCA has previously warned the public about My Wealth Legatus, suspecting the company of offering unregistered financial services and operating as a bank without the necessary authorisation. "Based on the evidence collected by the FSCA thus far, it appears that Nessfin conducted financial services business beyond what it is permitted by its current authorisation," FSCA said. "Also, in terms of governing law (being the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act), an FSP is prohibited from conducting financial services related business with any person that is not correctly authorised by the FSCA. Based on the nature of its relationship with Legatus, the FSCA is of the view that Nessfin also contravened the FAIS Act in this way" The financial watchdog also confirmed that the investigations into Nessfin are ongoing. "The investigation into Nessfin is ongoing, but at this stage, the FSCA has material concerns about Nessfin's business. Thus, the FSCA decided to provisionally withdraw the FSP licence of Nessfin as it is satisfied on reasonable grounds that substantial prejudice to clients and/or the general public may occur if the licence is not provisionally withdrawn," IOL Business Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel
The Citizen
5 days ago
- Business
- The Citizen
Industry leaders launch market surveillance code as Steinhoff fallout lingers
Aims to uphold integrity and prevent abuse, anti-competitive behaviour, and insider trading. FSCA investigators spend about 20% of their time assisting foreign regulators, including gathering trading records and financial data. Picture: Moneyweb The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has had to manage some of the most complex market abuse cases in the past eight years, including Steinhoff, regarded as the country's biggest corporate scandal to date. 'It's really been challenging,' says Alex Pascoe, head of market abuse at the FSCA. 'From December 2017, when Steinhoff announced accounting irregularities and its CEO Markus Jooste resigned, everything spiralled.' Pascoe was speaking at the launch of the South African Market Surveillance Code of Conduct in Cape Town on Tuesday, where he gave an account of the regulator's most prominent cases. The newly launched code of conduct is a joint initiative by South Africa's key financial institutions and regulators to align the country's market practices with global best standards. It aims to uphold market integrity and prevent abuse, anti-competitive behaviour, and insider trading. Although it does not replace existing regulations, it reinforces accountability from all market participants. ALSO READ: FSCA juggling high-profile cases with limited resources Case load Pascoe notes that the FSCA receives roughly 42 to 45 market abuse cases per year, but finalised 78 cases in its last financial year by implementing a World Bank-recommended case selection framework. Pascoe reflected on how the fallout from Steinhoff forced the FSCA to re-evaluate how it allocates investigative capacity. 'Everybody knew Jooste was Steinhoff, and Steinhoff was Jooste,' he says. 'From there on it spiralled – Viceroy and Tongaat [another accounting scandal], a mini-Steinhoff followed. It took a lot of resources to manage those cases, especially since they involved cross-border transactions.' (The Viceroy case refers to the FSCA's investigation into the US-based short-selling firm Viceroy Research, which was fined R50 million for publishing false and misleading statements about Capitec. The Tongaat accounting scandal involved the manipulation of financial statements by senior executives at sugar producer Tongaat Hulett to overstate the company's assets and profits.) ALSO READ: Secrecy surrounded Jooste's big FSCA fine and arrest warrant Jooste a 'brilliant' schemer The Steinhoff investigation is far from over. 'Last year we issued fines to Markus Jooste [of] R495 million. We are looking at his deceased estate and assets around the world,' said Pascoe. 'We won't just leave it at that. Ill-gotten gains – be [he] dead or alive – that's how serious we are. We are seeing this right through.' (Jooste, who faced multiple charges of fraud and racketeering and hefty fines from the JSE and the FSCA for financial misconduct, fatally shot himself in Hermanus in March 2024.) The South African Reserve Bank has already attached R1.4 billion in assets belonging to Jooste, but the global search continues. 'Most of his funds were hidden overseas,' says Pascoe. He adds that a second investigative report into Steinhoff is underway and has been shared with the commercial crimes court. 'Once preliminary findings are in, they [respondents] could make submissions.' Reflecting on lessons learned from Steinhoff, Pascoe says be on the lookout for a dominant CEO. The way Jooste set up the schemes was brilliant. ALSO READ: FSCA fines Markus Jooste R475 million, refers case to Hawks 'Only certain individuals knew what he wanted them to know. Nobody had the full picture.' He adds that Jooste's devices were wiped every two weeks, and hardly anything was documented. Steinhoff's complex global structure, multiple acquisitions, and lack of transparency made it difficult for stakeholders to understand the company's financial position. 'It was difficult to keep up and understand how everything fitted in,' says Pascoe. He also points to poor internal controls and captured auditors in Europe as contributing factors. 'The audits were not up to standard. And then, the culture of not questioning management.' FSCA investigators spend about 20% of their time assisting foreign regulators, including gathering trading records and financial data. 'We're getting requests from all over the world – Sweden, Belgium, even Pakistan,' said Pascoe. 'A lot of suspicious transactions are from overseas, and no longer from the JSE.' ALSO READ: Who will pay Markus Jooste's R510 million penalties now? Shadow trading The need for international collaboration was echoed by Tony Sio, head of regulatory strategy and innovation at Nasdaq's Anti-Financial Crime division, who also spoke at Tuesday's event. Sio shared developments in market abuse investigations, including a growing focus on shadow trading – a form of misconduct that remains largely unprosecuted but which are increasingly on the radar of regulators. 'Shadow trading is where insider traders don't trade in the companies themselves, but in economically-linked securities,' Sio explains. Although the practice started as a hypothetical scenario in an academic journal published in 2020, it is now being observed in market data. 'We found increases in volumes of linked securities before acquisitions.' He cites the 2021 case where the executive of a pharmaceutical company learned of an imminent takeover and used the information to buy options in a rival company likely to benefit from the news. 'His options doubled in value in one day. He thought he was smart by not buying in the company itself – but he was found liable.' ALSO READ: We can't afford another Jooste from Steinhoff Robust market surveillance attracts global investment Happy Shihau, head of compliance at Investec Corporate and Institutional Banking, who facilitated discussions at the launch event, stresses that the newly launched market surveillance conduct code complements – rather than replaces – regulatory rules and directives. Shihau says robust market surveillance is essential to attracting global investment. 'Investors worldwide seek to engage with trusted financial markets, and robust market surveillance is essential for upholding that trust.' She adds that the new code will help reinforce the regulatory environment and promote responsible behaviour across the industry. This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
The Citizen
6 days ago
- Business
- The Citizen
Missing broker, missing money
Investors in Estcourt are knocking on all doors in their search for millions they invested with a local financial advisor. The advisor's lawyer says the matter is subject to police investigations and all investors are regarded as potential state witnesses. Picture: AdobeStock At least 40 people in the small town of Estcourt in KwaZulu-Natal are desperately looking for their financial advisor amid allegations that investments that were supposed to be placed with financial institutions have gone missing. Rumours circulate among the town's 32 000 residents that as much as R200 million could be involved. Investors have been knocking on every possible door to try to find the owner of Wood & Boon Insurance Brokers, Rookshana Khan, or her daughter, Rubina Khan. Their first stop was the financial advisor's office, however, they usually found it deserted. The stream of worried investors then started knocking on the door of a financial advisor working in the same building. The next stop was the local police station, but it had received so many complaints the would-be investors were allegedly turned away. One investor laid a complaint with the Office of the Ombud for Financial Services Providers (Fais Ombud), saying that she had invested R500 000 in August 2024 with the goal of receiving a monthly income. The ombud replied that there was 'insufficient information' to investigate the matter. ALSO READ: FSCA fines Middelburg insurance broker R1 million and debars her for 15 years No response Wood & Boon is registered as a Financial Services Provider (FSP) with the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) – and Khan is listed as the key individual, compliance officer and one of the registered representatives. Her daughter is also listed as a representative. The investor received only two payments of R5 500 each, then nothing. She has been unable to get hold of Khan since August 2024 and still wants to know where her money is. The Fais Ombud said in its response to the complaint that there is no evidence that Khan had invested the money in a regulated financial product and the matter is outside of its authority. 'There is nothing to suggest that the respondent provided you with a financial service in respect of a recognised financial product as defined in the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services (Fais) Act to empower this office with the required jurisdiction to access and dispose of this complaint,' it said. It noted that the documents apparently show that the investor agreed to invest with Khan directly. ALSO READ: FSCA says watch out for these scammers Subject to police investigation The ombud also says it could not assist as it was unable to reach the Wood & Boon office nor any of its representatives. 'The respondent has, to date, not responded to your complaint despite the six-week period in terms of our rules having passed. The respondent has, however, responded to a few other complaints through her lawyers, Van Rooyen Attorneys Inc. 'In their letter, the representative of the respondent mentions that they act on behalf of Wood and Boon Insurance Brokers CC and Mrs R Khan. Mrs Khan is currently admitted to the hospital, and they are unable to obtain detailed instructions. 'In their response to this office, they mention that the current matter is the subject of a police investigation and, as such, their client would prefer not to respond to the complaint while the investigations are ongoing. 'In circumstances such as these, where there is no further information available and the respondent is not cooperating in providing the information, this Office is unable to take the matter further,' the Fais Ombud says. ALSO READ: FSCA warning: These well-known people cannot help you to invest Don't ask … On 16 January 2025, Khan's lawyers addressed a letter to 'Wood & Boon Investors' in which the lawyer, Ig van Rooyen, tells investors not to contact his clients asking about their investments, hinting at legal repercussions should they do so. 'We act on instructions of Mrs. R Khan. It is our instructions that investment clients of Wood & Boon Insurance Brokers CC are attempting to contact our client and her daughter directly regarding the status of their investments. 'Please note that this matter is subject to Police investigations and all investors are regarded as potential State witnesses. Communications between our client and investors may therefore be regarded as interference with State witnesses, either directly or indirectly. Our client therefore kindly requests that all attempts at communications with her or her family be stopped immediately,' wrote Van Rooyen. He said his client is cooperating with the authorities and has not left South Africa as some investors have claimed. Van Rooyen confirmed that he is still acting for Khan, but that he could not supply a telephone number on which she could be reached. The fact that the police as well as financial authorities are turning people away – and a legal letter that seems threatening – has fuelled rumours that Khan is being 'protected', according to one disappointed investor. Read the letter from Van Rooyen Attorneys Inc, as supplied by the Fais Ombud. ALSO READ: FSCA warns consumers about investments with these unregistered entities Wood & Boon still registered with FSCA While the Fais Ombud promised to forward the complaint to the FSCA for investigation, the FSCA was unaware of the allegations against the broker when asked for comment this week. Gerhard van Deventer, divisional executive of the FSCA's enforcement department, says Wood & Boon is still registered with the FSCA as an authorised Category I FSP. This allows the brokerage to give advice and act as intermediary for long and short term insurance and investment products. It can also give advice and sell authorised retail pension fund products and regulated collective investment products, such as unit trusts. Van Deventer says that, according to FSCA records, the brokerage and its representatives are in good standing with the FSCA, but it will immediately investigate. 'The FSCA has not received any complaints against the FSP or its key individual, Mrs R. Khan,' he says. The FSCA says that its rules and regulations require that contact information on record for key individuals and compliance officers must be correct at all times. 'This forms part of the operational ability requirements that FSPs are obligated to comply with,' says Van Deventer. This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
The Citizen
6 days ago
- Business
- The Citizen
FSCA juggling high-profile cases with limited resources
Regulator finalised 78 cases in its last financial year by implementing World Bank-recommended case selection framework. FSCA investigators spend about 20% of their time assisting foreign regulators, including gathering trading records and financial data. Picture: Moneyweb Despite having only nine investigators in its market abuse team, the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has had to manage some of South Africa's most complex market abuse cases – including the fallout from the Steinhoff accounting scandal. 'It's really been challenging,' says Alex Pascoe, head of market abuse at the FSCA. 'From December 2017, when Steinhoff announced accounting irregularities and its CEO Markus Jooste resigned, everything spiralled.' Pascoe was speaking at the launch of the South African Market Surveillance Code of Conduct in Cape Town on Tuesday, where he gave an account of the regulator's most prominent cases over the past eight years. The newly launched code of conduct is a joint initiative by South Africa's key financial institutions and regulators to align the country's market practices with global best standards. It aims to uphold market integrity and prevent abuse, anti-competitive behaviour, and insider trading. Although it does not replace existing regulations, it reinforces accountability from all market participants. ALSO READ: FSCA's Regulatory Actions Report shows impressive numbers of enforcement Case load Pascoe notes that the FSCA receives roughly 42 to 45 market abuse cases per year, but finalised 78 cases in its last financial year by implementing a World Bank-recommended case selection framework. 'We had to look at our resources – for the last 15 years, my team hasn't grown. We are just nine investigators.' Pascoe reflected on how the fallout from Steinhoff forced the FSCA to re-evaluate how it allocates investigative capacity. 'Everybody knew Jooste was Steinhoff, and Steinhoff was Jooste,' he says. 'From there on it spiralled – Viceroy and Tongaat [another accounting scandal], a mini-Steinhoff followed. It took a lot of resources to manage those cases, especially since they involved cross-border transactions.' (The Viceroy case refers to the FSCA's investigation into the US-based short-selling firm Viceroy Research, which was fined R50 million for publishing false and misleading statements about Capitec. The Tongaat accounting scandal involved the manipulation of financial statements by senior executives at sugar producer Tongaat Hulett to overstate the company's assets and profits.) ALSO READ: FSCA fines Markus Jooste R475 million, refers case to Hawks Jooste a 'brilliant' schemer The Steinhoff investigation is far from over. 'Last year we issued fines to Markus Jooste [of] R495 million. We are looking at his deceased estate and assets around the world,' said Pascoe. 'We won't just leave it at that. Ill-gotten gains – be [he] dead or alive – that's how serious we are. We are seeing this right through.' (Jooste, who faced multiple charges of fraud and racketeering and hefty fines from the JSE and the FSCA for financial misconduct, fatally shot himself in Hermanus in March 2024.) The South African Reserve Bank has already attached R1.4 billion in assets belonging to Jooste, but the global search continues. 'Most of his funds were hidden overseas,' says Pascoe. He adds that a second investigative report into Steinhoff is underway and has been shared with the commercial crimes court. 'Once preliminary findings are in, they [respondents] could make submissions.' Reflecting on lessons learned from Steinhoff, Pascoe says be on the lookout for a dominant CEO. The way Jooste set up the schemes was brilliant. 'Only certain individuals knew what he wanted them to know. Nobody had the full picture.' He adds that Jooste's devices were wiped every two weeks, and hardly anything was documented. Steinhoff's complex global structure, multiple acquisitions, and lack of transparency made it difficult for stakeholders to understand the company's financial position. 'It was difficult to keep up and understand how everything fitted in,' says Pascoe. He also points to poor internal controls and captured auditors in Europe as contributing factors. 'The audits were not up to standard. And then, the culture of not questioning management.' FSCA investigators spend about 20% of their time assisting foreign regulators, including gathering trading records and financial data. 'We're getting requests from all over the world – Sweden, Belgium, even Pakistan,' said Pascoe. 'A lot of suspicious transactions are from overseas, and no longer from the JSE.' ALSO READ: FSCA imposed about R943 million in penalties and debarred 156 people Shadow trading The need for international collaboration was echoed by Tony Sio, head of regulatory strategy and innovation at Nasdaq's Anti-Financial Crime division, who also spoke at Tuesday's event. Sio shared developments in market abuse investigations, including a growing focus on shadow trading – a form of misconduct that remains largely unprosecuted but which are increasingly on the radar of regulators. 'Shadow trading is where insider traders don't trade in the companies themselves, but in economically-linked securities,' Sio explains. Although the practice started as a hypothetical scenario in an academic journal published in 2020, it is now being observed in market data. 'We found increases in volumes of linked securities before acquisitions.' He cites the 2021 case where the executive of a pharmaceutical company learned of an imminent takeover and used the information to buy options in a rival company likely to benefit from the news. 'His options doubled in value in one day. He thought he was smart by not buying in the company itself – but he was found liable.' ALSO READ: FSCA to investigate banks charging different amounts for the same product Robust market surveillance attracts global investment Happy Shihau, head of compliance at Investec Corporate and Institutional Banking, who facilitated discussions at the launch event, stresses that the newly launched market surveillance conduct code complements – rather than replaces – regulatory rules and directives. Shihau says robust market surveillance is essential to attracting global investment. 'Investors worldwide seek to engage with trusted financial markets, and robust market surveillance is essential for upholding that trust.' She adds that the new code will help reinforce the regulatory environment and promote responsible behaviour across the industry. Follow Moneyweb's in-depth finance and business news on WhatsApp here.
IOL News
24-06-2025
- Business
- IOL News
FSCA's Deepfake Admission Sparks Industry Outrage: Why is Banxso facing the brunt?
The FSCA has issued a stark warning about deepfake investment scams targeting South Africans, implicating high-profile figures. Yet, why is Banxso facing severe penalties while others evade scrutiny? Image: IOL / Ron AI The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) has issued a damning public warning over a sophisticated network of deepfake investment scams exploiting high-profile South African figures, including President Cyril Ramaphosa, Dr Patrice Motsepe, Ms Leanne Manas, and Deputy President Paul Mashatile. But industry insiders are asking a pointed question: why is Banxso being crucified when others are quietly cautioned? This month's FSCA release formally acknowledges what many in the financial services industry have long suspected — that the problem of unauthorised third-party affiliates deploying AI-generated deepfake advertisements is industry-wide, not confined to one firm. Yet, in what critics describe as a deeply unbalanced enforcement approach, Banxso has seemingly become the regulator's scapegoat whilst other implicated platforms escape scrutiny. The Scale of Deception The FSCA's June 10, 2025, warning reveals the alarming sophistication of these fraud networks. Scammers are promising investors "unrealistic returns of between R13,000 and R17,000 per day, on an investment of R4,500" using fabricated endorsements from South Africa's most trusted public figures. In one particularly brazen deepfake video, Dr Motsepe appears to promote the investments, whilst Deputy President Mashatile is shown "confirming that the platform is authorised and that investors will receive returns". Another synthetic video features President Ramaphosa endorsing "guaranteed returns" — content so convincing it has fooled hundreds of potential investors. The FSCA explicitly states that "the individuals behind the platforms are not authorised in terms of any financial sector law to provide financial services to the public" and that these operators "failed to respond to FSCA queries." This represents a clear acknowledgement that multiple unauthorised entities are operating these schemes across various platforms and seemingly the FSCA has no way of combatting this. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Selective Enforcement Under Fire "Banxso acted swiftly when made aware of the deepfakes — refunding over R14 million of their own capital to affected consumers and laying criminal charges against the entity identified as operating the scam," an anonymous compliance expert said. "Other firms stayed silent or claimed ignorance. Why is only one company facing the full weight of enforcement?" Indeed, whilst the FSCA's press release highlights "platforms" plural using synthetic media to promote fraudulent investments, there is no specific mention of Banxso, nor any indication that Banxso continues to operate in connection with these ongoing scams. The regulatory warning appears to confirm that the deepfake problem extends far beyond any single financial services provider. Still, Banxso — a firm currently locked in multiple legal battles and awaiting judgment in a liquidation application that allegedly stems from the FSCA enforcement action — remains the only market participant to face such intense regulatory scrutiny and enforcement action. The company has not only ceased operations but has also proactively worked to trace the perpetrators of the fraudulent advertisements. Industry-Wide Problem, Singular Punishment "The FSCA is finally admitting that this isn't about one rogue actor. The deepfake threat is pervasive and sophisticated," said a fintech policy analyst. "These scammers are using unauthorised platforms, fake documentation, and AI-generated content to deceive consumers on a massive scale. But the regulator's response has been wildly inconsistent. Where is the fairness in targeting the one company that did the right thing?" The FSCA's own guidance emphasises that consumers should "verify that an entity or individual is authorised by the FSCA to provide financial products and services" and warns against "investment or trading offers on social media platforms or any unsolicited offers." This advice tacitly acknowledges that the deepfake threat spans multiple channels and operators — yet enforcement action remains concentrated on a single entity. Legal documents reviewed by IOL confirm that Banxso has initiated criminal proceedings against those behind what they believe to be the third party affiliate marketing scam, a fraudulent offshore entity believed to be at the centre of these AI-powered scams. The company has cooperated fully with authorities, and voluntarily compensated affected consumers — actions that stand in stark contrast to the unnamed platforms that continue operating without consequence. Questions of Proportionality "There is no question that regulation is necessary to protect consumers from these sophisticated fraud networks," added the regulatory source. "But we must ask who it truly protects when it turns a blind eye to some actors whilst hanging others out to dry. The FSCA's own warning confirms this is an industry-wide crisis, yet only one firm faces consequences for crimes it neither initiated nor condoned." The regulator's approach becomes more questionable when considering that the FSCA provides multiple verification methods for consumers to check authorisation status, including a toll-free number (0800 110 443) and online databases. These resources exist precisely because unauthorised operators are a systemic problem across the financial services landscape, not an isolated incident. Regulatory Inconsistency Under Spotlight The FSCA has advised the public to exercise "caution when considering investment or trading offers on social media platforms" and to verify that "the FSP number utilised by the entity or individual offering financial services matches the name of the FSP on the FSCA database." This guidance implicitly acknowledges that multiple unauthorised entities are exploiting regulatory gaps and consumer trust. Yet despite this industry-wide acknowledgement, enforcement actions remain conspicuously one-sided. Whilst unnamed platforms continue operating with apparent impunity, Banxso remains embroiled in costly legal proceedings despite its proactive response to the fraud network. "The selective enforcement sends a dangerous message to the industry," observed a former FSCA official. "Companies that cooperate, self-report, and take corrective action face harsher treatment than those who remain silent or deny responsibility. This approach will inevitably discourage transparency and cooperation in future incidents." The Broader Implications The FSCA's deepfake warning represents more than just consumer protection — it's an admission that South Africa's financial regulatory framework is struggling to keep pace with sophisticated AI-powered fraud networks. These criminals exploit the trust South Africans place in respected public figures whilst operating through unauthorised offshore entities that deliberately evade regulatory oversight. The scams described in the FSCA warning, promising guaranteed daily returns through fabricated celebrity endorsements, represent a clear and present danger to consumer confidence in legitimate financial services. Yet the regulator's response suggests a troubling pattern of selective enforcement that may ultimately undermine its stated objectives. Call for Balanced Response As artificial intelligence continues blurring the line between authentic and fabricated content, and as scammers become increasingly sophisticated in their tactics, the need for a coherent and even-handed regulatory response has never been more urgent. The FSCA's own warning confirms that deepfake investment fraud is a systemic threat requiring industry-wide vigilance and proportionate enforcement. But for now, Banxso remains the public face of a crime it neither initiated nor condoned whilst other implicated platforms escape meaningful scrutiny. The company paid dearly to correct a fraud perpetrated against it and its clients yet continues facing disproportionate regulatory consequences whilst the actual perpetrators operate with apparent impunity. The FSCA has not commented directly on the perceived imbalance in its enforcement actions, despite mounting questions from the financial services community about the consistency and fairness of its regulatory approach. With consumer protection hanging in the balance, South Africa's financial sector deserves regulatory oversight that targets actual wrongdoers. For verification of authorised financial service providers: Toll-free: 0800-110-443 Online: Click here. FSP Search: Click here. IOL
