Jaipal Singh (Case reference: 02011)
| Case Number | 02011 |
| Published date | 18 March 2010 |
| Adjudicated Party | Jaipal Singh |
| Procedure Type | Naming Case (Phone-Paid Services Authority) |
THE CODE COMPLIANCE PANEL OF PHONEPAYPLUS
TRIBUNAL DECISION
Thursday 4 March 2010
TRIBUNAL SITTING No. 48/ CASE 3
CASE REFERENCE: 805602/JI
Associated Individual: Jaipal Singh
Service Provider: Jay Singh t/a JST Promotions
THIS CASE WAS BROUGHT AGAINST AN ASSOCIATED INDIVIDUAL
UNDER PARAGRAPH 8.9.4 OF THE CODE
BACKGROUND
PhonepayPlus had evidence suggesting that Mr Jaipal Singh was involved in a number of
companies which had been subject to adjudication in relation to a serious breach, or series
of breaches, of the PhonepayPlus Code of Practice (11th Edition Amended April 2008) (‘the
Code’).
The Tribunal considered a report prepared by the Executive in accordance with paragraph
8.9.4 of the Code and was minded to name Mr Jaipal Singh as an associated individual. The
Executive commenced the naming procedure under the following paragraph of the Code of
Practice:
Paragraph 8.9.2 f and g - Knowing involvement in a serious breach, or series of
breaches, of the Code
The Investigation
The Executive has conducted this investigation in accordance with paragraph 8.9.4 of the
Code.
The Executive sent a letter to Jaipal Singh on 7 January 2010, confirming the pursuance of
the naming procedure and enclosing documentation referred to in the letter.
Jaipal Singh contacted the Executive by telephone on 8 January 2010. A summary of the
call as interpreted by the Executive was sent to Jaipal Singh on 11 January 2010. As Jaipal
Singh had informed the Executive that the email address it had used to send
correspondence was incorrect, the Executive re-sent the original letter and documentation
on the same date.
A formal response to the letter was provided by Jaipal Singh on 19 January 2010, along with
a covering statement. Jaipal Singh did not exercise his right to make an Informal
Representation to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal made a decision on the proposed sanction on 4 March 2010.
SUBMISSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
To continue reading
Request your trial