On 9 May 2022 the Disciplinary Tribunal Panel considered a charge of misconduct against Mr Brunskill (the respondent).
The IFoA’s charge against the respondent was that, in or around December 2017, he provided calculations of the solvency capital requirement for Company B to Company B’s management that were purportedly in accordance with the applicable Solvency II regulations. In those calculations he: did not calculate the solvency capital requirement for Company B as at 31 March 2018 in accordance with the applicable Solvency II regulations, and; significantly understated the solvency capital requirement for Company B in the calculation of the solvency capital requirement as at 31 March 2018. His actions were alleged to be in breach of the principles of competence and care, and of compliance in the Actuaries’ Code (version 2.0). It was also alleged that in or around February 2019, he did not communicate appropriately with Company B and/or its new actuarial advisers in that he did not provide information requested by it, in breach of the principle of communication in the Actuaries’ Code (version 2.0).
The panel found all of the elements of the charge proved, by admission, and that they constituted misconduct.
The panel determined that the most appropriate and proportionate sanction was a reprimand and a fine of £5,000.