FCA v. Neil Danziger (benchmark submission rigging, 2018)
Status unknown
Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.
In 2018, the Financial Conduct Authority brought an action against Neil Danziger, alleging conduct this library classifies as benchmark submission rigging, cash vs derivatives schemes and wash trading. The release does not state a monetary figure that we were able to extract. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | FCA |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2018-01-08 |
| Date resolved | 2018-01-08 |
| Status | unknown |
| Venue | OTC |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Defendants | Neil Danziger |
| Techniques | Benchmark submission rigging , Cash versus derivatives schemes , Wash trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- £250k
What is alleged to have happened
the Financial Conduct Authority announced this matter on January 8, 2018. The respondents named are Neil Danziger (1 individual, 0 entities).
This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging, cash vs derivatives schemes and wash trading, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.
The conduct is recorded against unclassified instruments, with OTC identified in the release.
The release references a parallel criminal proceeding. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.
For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with 3 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.
- Benchmark submission rigging — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Cash versus derivatives schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2018-01-08 FCA final notice
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCA v. Jeremy Kraft (benchmark submission rigging, 2015) | FCA | 2015-01-22 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes +2 | — | settled |
| FCA v. The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (benchmark submission rigging, 2013) | FCA | 2013-02-06 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes +2 | — | settled |
| FCA v. Travis Lloyd Klein (cash vs derivatives schemes, 2024) | FCA | 2024-11-18 | Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes , Wash Trading | — | unknown |
| CFTC v. unnamed respondents (cash vs derivatives schemes, 2022) | CFTC | 2022-10-20 | Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes , Exchange Wash Trading +4 | $41m | judgment |
| OSC v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank (benchmark submission rigging, 2019) | OSC | 2019-08-26 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Front Running +3 | — | settled |
| FCA v. Terry John Farr (benchmark submission rigging, 2019) | FCA | 2019-05-29 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Wash Trading | — | judgment |