What is a public offering of securities insurance ?
Public offering of securities insurance protects a company and its directors against liabilities arising from offering the company’s securities for sale and listing on the public stock exchange.
Who is covered / insured
What is the need for POSI
What is the uniqueness of this cover
Key feature of POSI insurance
Why have POSI when already D&O Insurance is in place?
It is a nonrenewal policy that ring-fences against specific risk exposure. It provides coverage over and above D&O policies that do not have cover for securities offer and listing on the stock exchange.
POSI | D&O |
Multiyear policy | Policy for one year |
Single payment of premium for the multiyear policy | Premium paid on an annual basis |
Prospectus liability included | Prospectus liability excluded |
Provide coverage for selling shareholders, controlling shareholders, and underwriters | Does not provide cover for the selling shareholder, controlling shareholder, and underwriters. |
Coverages under POSI policy
Section 1: Standard Cover
what is not covered / exclusions
Who can use ?
MAJOR REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE ISSUE OF PROSPECTUS THAT COMPANIES NEED TO ADHERE.
- The securities and exchange board of India Regulations
- SEBI ( disclosure and investor protection) Guidelines 2000
- Companies Act pertinent provisions.
- Criminal liability for misstatement in the prospectus (sec. 34)
- Civil liability for misstatement in the prospectus (sec. 35)
- Punishments for fraudulently inducing persons to invest money ( sec.36)
- Actions by the affected person (sec. 37)
- Additional disclosures requirement ( sec.26)
- What is expected from Directors and officers?
- Diligent execution of duties
- Strict compliance
- Effective disclosures
- Prudent risk management
CLAIMS SCENARIO EXAMPLES.
- Non-disclosure of material information in the IPO document. SEBI imposes a fine on leading property developers, its chairman, and top management for not disclosing certain material information in the IPO document.
- Misleading investors about financial prospectus and internal controls. A District judge alleged that the accused, a global e-commerce company used improper refund accounting to boost revenue and reduce operating losses in IPO materials and subsequent regulatory filings.
- Class action litigation. accusing the company of hiding worries about growth prior to IPO. Shareholders class accused a social media company of concealing internal concerns that might lead to lesser growth.
- Poor quality assets A manufacturing company initiates a public right offering, but its prospectus fails to adequately report the poor quality of its assets. Shareholders who purchase rights based on this information are disappointed when the share price falls following listing. Shareholders take legal action against the company claiming that it failed to ensure that the prospectus information was not misleading and that it failed to ensure that the prospectus did not omit any information reasonably required for a shareholder to make an informed assessment of the company’s financial position.
- Frozen proceeds. A services company is alleged to have materially overstated its financial position in the issue of its initial public offer prospectus. The regulator obtains an interim court order to freeze the funds raised in the offering. During this time the regulator conducts investigations and concludes that investors in the company should be compensated for the financial losses they sustained for purchasing shares on the basis of the misleading information.
- Redundancy Program. Shortly after its initial public offering of securities, a manufacturing company announces a major redundancy program. The company’s share price falls straight after the announcement, resulting in an immediate loss of value to many of the investors in the IPO. Investors sued the company alleging non-disclosure of this material information in the prospectus.
- Missed profit targets. A construction company issues a prospectus for an IPO which includes financial forecasts for the forthcoming year. Following the float the company falls well short of its forecasts, issuing several profit warnings and the share price falls dramatically. Investors who purchased shares on the basis of the prospectus pursue legal action to recover their losses, citing, amongst other things, the company and its directors’ misleading and deceptive conduct.
- Regulators tipped off. A far eastern company withdraws its public rights offer shortly before it is due to close after regulators receive a complaint that the company had failed to disclose that it was in substantial legal disputes over terminated contracts. Its directors and other individuals involved in preparing the prospectus face investigation, legal action, and possible civil and criminal liabilities for any false and misleading statements made in its prospectus.