𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Former hedge fund manager Crispin Odey “acted to save his own skin” during an investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against him and showed “arrogant entitlement”, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has said.

On Monday, a tribunal dismissed Mr Odey’s challenge against the authority’s decision to ban him from the UK finance industry in March last year due to a “lack of integrity”.

The decision was taken over his handling of disciplinary processes regarding his alleged sexual misconduct at his firm, Odey Asset Management (OAM).

Mr Odey was given a final written warning by OAM in 2021 over dozens of historical allegations of inappropriate conduct by him towards female employees at the company between 2003 and 2020.

But he was later alleged to have breached the terms of the warning by sexually harassing a temporary receptionist later that year.

Mr Odey then twice dismissed members of OAM’s executive committee (ExCo), which was investigating the alleged breach, leaving himself as its sole member.

In a 229-page ruling, the Upper Tribunal found that Mr Odey “was aware he held power and at times he exercised it with junior female staff for personal gratification”.

It also said that Mr Odey had “no reasonable basis” removing the ExCos and did so as he “feared they would not find in his favour”, concluding that it was “satisfied that Mr Odey lacked integrity”.

In response to the ruling, Therese Chambers, executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: “Mr Odey clearly thought he could act with impunity.

“He twice sacked those tasked with protecting female employees from his inappropriate behaviour when they tried to hold him to account.

“He felt the rules shouldn’t apply to him and acted to save his own skin.

“During the hearing he reinvented history, painted himself as a victim and displayed no contrition.

“That arrogant entitlement and the resulting complete disregard for proper governance means Mr Odey is unfit to work in financial services.”

In the tribunal’s ruling, Mr Justice Thompsell, Upper Tribunal Judge Rupert Jones and Upper Tribunal member Cathy Farquharson said that Mr Odey “appeared contrite” when given the “generous” final written warning, but that this was a “momentary expression” to “reduce the prospect of dismissal”.

They said Mr Odey’s beliefs at the time he dismissed the ExCos “reflected a warped set of values based on a strong sense of entitlement”.

They said: “He knew the consequences of his actions and it was unreasonable for him to take the risks he did.

“Through his conduct, Mr Odey demonstrated a reckless disregard for OAM’s governance and compliance with regulatory rules and requirements.

“Mr Odey’s conduct also risked entrenching an existing culture within OAM, where inappropriate behaviour by him towards female employees had been normalised, and where there was a belief amongst some employees, at least, that allegations of misconduct against Mr Odey would not be properly scrutinised or challenged and/or that such behaviour would be tolerated.

“We are satisfied that none of Mr Odey’s purported justifications for his conduct provide any reasonable justification for it.”

They added: “Furthermore, Mr Odey’s evidence in these proceedings has demonstrated that there remains a lack of insight into why his conduct, in particular, in twice removing ExCo, lacks integrity.

“He has expressed no contrition for it. He sees nothing wrong with his approach, and indeed he wrongly sees himself as the victim of both OAM’s actions and the authority’s.”

The authority’s barristers told the tribunal in London earlier this year that its decision to ban him from the City was “reasonably open to it”.

Clare Sibson KC, for the FCA, said in written submissions that the dismissal of the ExCos was “motivated by Mr Odey’s self-interest”.

Lawyers for Mr Odey said the former hedge fund manager acted out of a belief that he was facing an unfair process, which would result in his removal from the company.

Mr Odey also denied the allegations, and said in a witness statement that he believed he became “a poster boy for the authority’s agenda” and was the victim of “a campaign by the authority to achieve my removal”.

The FCA had previously also fined Mr Odey £1,835,200, which the tribunal reduced to £1,529,374.