.jpg)
Garry James Patterson has been sentenced to 200 hours’ community work and three months’ community detention after pleading guilty to two charges brought by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA).
Patterson, originally from Queenstown, was sentenced at Christchurch District Court after he pleaded guilty to offering financial advice while not being registered, and obstructing the FMA’s investigation into his conduct.
According to the FMA, Patterson offered financial advice in relation to various insurance policies to customers, who believed that they were dealing with a registered financial adviser. The FMA began its investigation into Patterson after receiving a complaint.
Her Honour Judge Farish stated that Patterson “had a degree of knowledge in relation to his offending,” and that by claiming to be a financial adviser, he was offending “against both individuals and the financial markets as a whole.”
“Mr Patterson was not registered, which meant customers did not have the protections they should have had, such as access to an independent dispute resolution scheme,” said FMA head of enforcement Karen Chang. “These protections are important as insurance products can be complex, and people go to financial advisers to help them to get the appropriate product.”
Patterson also failed to observe a statutory notice to attend an interview, a non-optional legal requirement. According to Chang, gathering information and conducting interviews is “vitally important for the performance of the FMA’s functions, and, in particular, the investigation of potential breaches of law,” and so it is appropriate to bring criminal charges for non-compliance.
The FMA has also issued a public warning to former registered financial adviser Jonathan Simon Antony Branton-Casey in relation to his involvement in Patterson’s offences.
“Branton-Casey facilitated Patterson’s offending, and in doing so failed to exercise the care, diligence and skill expected of a reasonable financial adviser,” the FMA stated. “He has voluntarily de-registered as a financial adviser, and co-operated with the FMA in its investigation of these matters. In these circumstances, the FMA is satisfied that the public interest supports a public warning rather than a court action.”
