In a London courtroom, hedge fund tycoon Crispin Odey stated he has no memory of cornering a female employee after a “boozy lunch” and telling her, “I could attack you now.” The 67-year-old financier, appearing before the Upper Tribunal in a bid to overturn a ban from the UK’s financial services industry, conceded the employee was an “attractive girl” but said he was unaware she kept a diary where the alleged 2020 encounter was recorded.
Courtroom Testimony and Specific Claims
Under cross-examination by the Financial Conduct Authority’s barrister, Clare Sibson, Odey was presented with the diary entry dated 24 January 2020. It recorded his alleged words: “I could attack you now. Me: Please don’t. Him: You could sue me for that.” Odey told the tribunal that upon reading such accounts, “it’s no surprise I don’t remember them. They were words.”
The FCA’s case, however, extends far beyond this single incident. The regulator’s decision in March 2025 to ban Odey and fine him £1.8 million was based on a finding of a “lack of integrity,” alleging he deliberately frustrated internal investigations into his conduct. Odey denies this, claiming the FCA developed a “hostile animus” towards him and made him a “poster boy” for its agenda on non-financial misconduct.
He admitted to other specific acts, including groping a female colleague’s breasts without consent in 2005, which he blamed on being under sedatives after a root canal. He told the tribunal the woman accepted his apology and worked at his firm for another eight years. When the FCA’s lawyer suggested this showed he found it hard to control himself, Odey replied: “No, this was 2005, we are now (in) 2026.”
Another allegation involved a receptionist in her mid-20s whom Odey invited to a shooting weekend in 2020. She declined, later telling investigators she knew “what was expected of me.” Odey described their relationship as “consensual” and “very flirtatious,” alleging she was a “flirt” who made other staff jealous. He conceded his flirtations might have made him seem like a “creepy old man” and admitted to telling her she should wear better clothes and calling her “frumpy”—behaviour he described as “bullying” but questioned as sexual harassment.
Odey’s Defence and the Internal Investigation
Central to Odey’s defence is his assertion that he did not obstruct processes but sought clarity from the FCA. In his witness statement, he said he attempted to have the regulator rule on whether he was “fit and proper” before any internal disciplinary action, as he “could not contemplate a hastily convened disciplinary process… before the authority had completed its investigation.” He argued his actions were aimed at saving Odey Asset Management (OAM), not mere self-preservation.
This defence is set against findings from a major internal investigation. In 2020, OAM’s executive committee commissioned City law firm Simmons & Simmons to probe the allegations. That investigation uncovered at least 46 historical claims of inappropriate conduct, ranging from an accusation of sexual assault in the office to Odey asking a receptionist to try on a skirt. An employee of the law firm reportedly told the FCA that Odey touched female staff without consent and that junior staff felt “unable to stop” him due to his seniority.
When presented with these findings in 2021, Odey acknowledged that “aspects of his behaviour needed to change” and received a final written warning. In his statement to the tribunal, he admitted to being “something of a dinosaur” who had not “adapted to the modern working environment,” and that the investigation made it clear he had “got things wrong.” He added: “It was not right that members of staff felt uncomfortable because of my behaviour.”
The FCA, however, contends Odey showed “reckless disregard” for compliance and treated internal processes with “contempt.” An FCA official expressed concern that OAM’s disciplinary approach was too lenient and that Odey, as majority shareholder, used his power to thwart investigations and received favourable treatment.
Broader Legal and Regulatory Fallout
The tribunal appeal is just one strand of Odey’s extensive legal battles. He is facing civil personal injury claims from five women, including one accusation of rape, all of which he denies. Separately, he has launched a £79m libel lawsuit against the Financial Times over its 2023 reporting of the allegations, which the newspaper is defending on the grounds of public interest and accuracy.
A High Court judge has ordered that the libel case and the five personal injury claims be tried together in a joint trial on liability, scheduled for June-July 2026, to avoid inconsistent findings.
The fallout from the allegations, which emerged publicly in summer 2023, ultimately proved fatal to his business. OAM announced plans to close in October 2023, and by January 2026 was set to cease trading and become a “dormant” company, with its funds transferred elsewhere. This followed major financial institutions cutting ties with the firm.
Odey, who founded OAM in 1991 and gained prominence as a Brexit-backing Conservative donor, was previously charged with indecent assault in May 2020 relating to a 1998 complaint. He was acquitted after a trial in March 2021.
