This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

Labour wants new regulator's 'value for money' remit extended

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Labour wants the Financial Conduct Authority’s competition objective extended so it has to consider how easily consumers can find appropriate products that are value for money.

The proposed change to the Financial Services Bill would add to the regulator’s operational objective of promoting effective competition in the interests of consumers by setting out what those interests are.

The bill already says the regulator should take account of the varying needs of different consumers and the information they need to make informed choices, the ease of switching providers, the potential for new entrants to the market and how far competition is encouraging innovation.

Labour wants a further “have regard” added to this list so the FCA also considers “the ease with which consumers can identify and obtain services which are appropriate to their needs and represent good value for money”.

Shadow Treasury financial secretary Chris Leslie says: “I want the FCA to be able to stop unfair overdraft charges, excessive fees and complicated pricing structures where they hinder transparency that might benefit the consumer.”

Guidance, published alongside the bill in January, said the FCA will not directly regulate prices but will try to spot potential consumer detriment and flaws in competition by looking at “comparative prices” and hidden costs. It said: “We expect the FCA will take a keener and more informed interest in questions of value for money than the FSA has done.” This objective would give the FCA a statutory requirement to carry out that role.

Leslie says: “The Government has not gone far enough to tackle behind-the-scenes prices which can mask the true costs of financial services. An FCA that looks at how easily consumers can identify and obtain products which fit their circumstances properly and are clearly value for money is part and parcel of the comprehensive definition of a competition objective.”

The amendment was put forward by Leslie and shadow Treasury economic secretary Cathy Jamieson, and will be looked at during the bill’s committee stage which starts tomorrow. Until March 20, 20 MPs, including the Treasury financial secretary Mark Hoban, will go through the bill line by line debating proposed changes.

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

Money Marketing Awards 2015
Put your firm forward as the leading practitioner in your field. Adviser and Advertising categories are open to entries - Enter Now.

Readers' comments (3)

  • How about a value for money regulatory structure?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "The Government has not gone far enough to tackle behind-the-scenes prices which can mask the true costs of financial services"
    The cost of Regulation, which is very much behind the scene, should be tackled first and foremost.
    No doubt Leslie, like most MPs, has no idea re the cost of regulation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you insist on forcing advisers to work for peanuts you'll just get monkeys - all professional advisers need to earn a decent income to offset the huge liabilities and costs of just surviving.

    If lower costs are forced on the industry, there wont be a viable business left to go to !!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick


Do you see the value in adviser trade bodies?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments