R500,000 Lost, R260,000 Earned: FNB Adviser’s Debarment Upheld After ‘Prioritising Personal Gain’

A financial adviser debarred by First National Bank (FNB) after allegedly prioritising personal gain over a client’s interests has failed in her bid to overturn her ban.

The tribunal, chaired by Advocate Sandhya Mahabeer SC, dismissed an application by Anusha Singh to reconsider her debarment under the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act (FAIS) .

The Case

Singh handled a long-standing client’s R2 million investment in a Discovery Invest Guaranteed Income Plan, from which the client was receiving returns of R9,125 per month.

The client initially sought to access about R50,000 from her investment.

Instead of exploring less harmful options, Singh advised the client to surrender the entire policy to a third-party entity, Value Added Solutions (VAS) .

The policy was sold for approximately R1.5 million.

The result:

• The client suffered a loss of about R500,000 in capital

• Monthly income dropped from R9,125 to roughly R7,000

The tribunal found the client had never intended to liquidate her full investment.

The Commission

Singh received around R260,000 from VAS between 2022 and 2024.

She admitted to receiving at least R50,000 linked to the client’s transaction, which she described as a “token of gratitude.”

The panel found these payments far exceeded permissible thresholds and were not disclosed to her employer.

Further, the payments were allegedly disguised in bank records under misleading descriptions such as “chairs,” “bicycles,” and “tyres” suggesting an attempt to conceal their true nature.

The Findings

The tribunal concluded that Singh:

• Acted in conflict of interest

• Failed to disclose material financial benefit

• Earned “double commission” through both the cession and reinvestment

• Did not act in the client’s best interests

Her advice was found to be incomplete and misleading, particularly her assertion that the client could not access funds within a certain period. Evidence showed partial withdrawals were possible.

The panel also criticised Singh for failing to ensure the clientwhose primary language was not Englishfully understood the implications.

The Outcome

In upholding the debarment, the tribunal emphasised that financial advisers must meet strict “fit and proper” requirements, including honesty and integrity.

“The applicant failed to act in the best interests of the client and prioritised personal gain.”

Singh argued she acted on the client’s instructions, believed her conduct was acceptable, and should have been treated with leniency.

The tribunal rejected these arguments, finding no basis to interfere with FNB’s decision.

The Bottom Line

R500,000 lost. R260,000 earned. A client misled. A career ended.

The tribunal’s message is clear: financial advisers who prioritise their own pockets over their clients’ interests will face the consequences.