FMA quiet on cost of Milford case

Anthony Quirk, managing director of Milford Asset Management. The Financial Markets Authority won't say how much money has been spent probing claims of market manipulation from one of its traders.

New Zealand's financial regulator is refusing to reveal exactly what it spent investigating Milford Asset Management and one of its traders for alleged market manipulation, claiming the costs in the case are "sensitive" and their disclosure possibly prejudicial.

Milford last month paid $1.5 million in a settlement following a Financial Markets Authority probe, $1.1 million of which will go to the Crown, with the balance covering the costs of the regulator's investigation.

One of Milford's portfolio managers is still facing enforcement action.

Milford portfolio manager Mark Warminger ceased to be involved with the firm's investment team, without explanation, last month.

The company last month would not comment on whether Warminger was the individual still under investigation by the FMA.

An Official Information Act request into what the FMA has spent on the case bore little fruit and was declined by the regulator yesterday afternoon.

"While the FMA's concerns regarding Milford's conduct have been addressed, the enforcement processes with respect to the individual continue. Therefore, while the matter remains open it is the FMA's opinion that the costs incurred and being incurred are sensitive and the disclosure of them could prejudice the ongoing conduct of the case," the FMA's senior solicitor Ginny Coubrough said when declining it.

In another market manipulation case last year, the FMA spent $400,000 more investigating Diligent Board Member Services' founder Brian Henry than it got back from him in penalties.