On 13 August 2018, the Adjudication Panel considered an allegation of misconduct against Mr Christopher Robert Cyril Bowring, FIA (the Respondent).
It was alleged that from 9 November 2016 until 8 June 2018 he acted as chief actuary to an insurance company without holding the relevant Practising Certificate. It was alleged that such actions constituted a breach of Bye-Law 40 of the Bye-Laws of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries; a breach of the requirement of paragraph 3.1 of Actuarial Professional Standard G1 (APS G1); a breach of the requirement of paragraph 1.1 of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries' Practising Certificate Scheme (2016/17 and 2017/18); and a breach of Compliance principle 4 of the Actuaries' Code ('the Code').
The Panel agreed that by acting as chief actuary to an insurance company without holding the relevant Practising Certificate from 9 November 2016 until 8 June 2018, when he stepped down, Mr Bowring was in breach of the above requirements at the material time.
It was also alleged that he failed to complete and pass the General Insurance Practice Module, such a failure constituting a breach of paragraph 3.5 of the Practising Certificate Scheme: Transition Arrangements for Chief Actuary certificates received on or before 31 December 2018 (version 1.1: effective 1 July 2015); and a breach of compliance principle 4 of the Code.
The Panel considered Mr Bowring's failure to pass the General Insurance Practice Module to amount to a breach of the above requirements. It determined that there was a prima facie case of misconduct and imposed a reprimand and a £7,500 fine.
In considering sanctions and, in particular, the imposition of the maximum fine available to the Adjudication Panel, the Panel had regard to the senior position and responsibilities of Mr Bowring's role as chief actuary. The Panel also had regard to the requirement for him to comply with professional standards, which are designed to demonstrate appropriate skills and ability to undertake such a role. This is an important part of the privileged position of holding a reserved appointment as a member of a professional body. In addition, the Panel had regard to the need to maintain public confidence in the reputation of the profession. Mr Bowring's failures could have had a serious adverse effect on the reputation of the profession.
A copy of the Panel's full determination, including reasons for its decision, can be found on the IFoA's website at bit.ly/1OgDqKy