The Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) has initiated enforcement action against Angie Sau Chu Lau, alleging that Lau is not suitable to be licensed after she used undue influence to control and direct her clients when they liquidated their investments. The proposed sanction is also for failing to disclose any conflicts of interest associated with the investment she was recommending.

“FSRA is proposing to revoke the insurance agent license of Lau and to impose administrative penalties in the total amount of $150,000,” the regulator’s announcement about Lau’s interim suspension indicates. “Lau has requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal about this proposal. FSRA has imposed an interim suspension order on Lau, which has been extended until the hearing has concluded.” 

Broken down, the proposed penalty includes a $100,000 sanction for using inducement, coercion or undue influence in order to control, direct or secure insurance business, and an administrative penalty of $50,000 for failing to disclose a conflict of interest in writing.

Lau was first licensed as a life insurance and accident and sickness insurance agent in February 2016. Her contract with a financial institution was terminated in March 2024, at which time the company reported the agent to FSRA.

A longstanding client base 

In addition to being licensed as an insurance agent, Lau was also licensed as a dealing representative. Members of her client base, described as a longstanding client base with many clients who trusted Lau, were approached between January and March 2024 and convinced to cash out their segregated funds to provide Lau with the proceeds. Some segregated fund clients incurred fees while others, who redeemed the funds from their Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs), were subject to taxes.

In total, 36 of Lau’s clients redeemed their investments, totalling $2,279,915.04. At least $781,623 of the client funds were deposited to Lau’s personal bank accounts. Once this happened, Lau told clients she’d been scammed, that post-dated checks related to the investment she was recommending would not be honoured and that the funds would not be recovered.

“When the [financial institution] investigated Lau for the unusually high number of client redemptions, Lau provided false information intended to deceive,” the notice of proposal in the case states. She told the financial institution that the “redemptions were initiated by clients for personal or financial reasons and that she had not received any of the funds.” 

Lau did not attend interviews with the regulator or provide the requested records. “Lau did not participate in FSRA’s investigation,” the notice adds.

“Lau filed a fraud report with the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC). In the complaint, Lau stated that she was the victim of a $3-million crypto-currency fraud. She did not identify which portion of the losses were client funds,” the notice continues. “Lau’s bank account records show large transfers of funds to different recipients. The names of the recipients do not match the names in Lau’s complaint, nor the name of the crypto platform.” 

The notice concludes, saying Lau is not suitable to be licensed and is not of good character or reputation to be licensed under the province’s Insurance Act. “Her conduct poses a significant risk to consumers that cannot be cured by attaching conditions to [her] license.”