FSA is interviewing Park Row advisers
Share
Former Park Row advisers still waiting to gain reauthorisation are being summoned by the regulator to attend interviews.
In a letter in response to an adviser’s enquiry, seen by Money Marketing, FSA chief executive Hector Sants admits the ongoing KPMG past business review has caused a significant delay in reauthorising advisers.
It says: “In some cases, where we believe the progress of an application can be more effectively dealt with by assessing an individual face to face, we may request the attendance of a candidate for interview. Such interviews are conducted on a voluntary basis and are, by their very nature, confidential. I can confirm that a small number of former Park Row advisers have attended such interviews.”
Park Row, which had 240 advisers, was wound up in November 2009. The FSA will not disclose how many advisers have been called for interview or how many have failed to get reauthorisation.
A law firm, which wants to remain anonymous, says it has taken four cases where authorisation applications were initially rejected by the FSA to the regulatory decisions committee and overturned all four cases.
KPMG, which was given the job of reviewing past business of Park Row advisers, is understood to have outsourced the work. KPMG was unavailable for comment.
An FSA spokeswoman says: “There is a statutory limit of up to three months when somebody applies for authorisation, whether they have been authorised before or not. We can extend that if there are concerns which mean we need to take more time. In any authorisation process, if we get to the point we need to interview a candidate, we will do.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (25)
Chris F | 14 Apr 2011 1:04 pm
It is absolutely shocking that this process can take so long. In the meantime, an adviser is deprived of his or her ability to earn money and hence feed and clothe his or her family and clients will almost certainly go without advice.
How this can be fair in any sense of the word, I do not know.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Paul Veitch | 14 Apr 2011 1:09 pm
Where we we be without the FSA, an organisation which gives the banks a free reign to rip clients off, overcharge and record record numbers of complaints and appears determined to drive out the Independant Financial Advice sector. I wonder who interviwed FSA senior management last year after they were fined by the OFT for bullying there own staff. Why are we putting up with this lot.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 14 Apr 2011 1:14 pm
Agree with Chris.
And they have the gall to make us study ethics!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Potton | 14 Apr 2011 1:38 pm
Easy to blame the FSA on this one but reading between the lines, the quality of the business review appears to be a significant factor here.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike | 14 Apr 2011 1:39 pm
We are supposed to be professionals. If fellow professionals eg Solicitors / accountants firms are 'wound up', do they have this problem moving to other positions? I don't think so. Depriving people of their right to work is an abuse. When Hector Sants becomes the deputy governor of the Bank if England and his other cohorts take their positions, I trust they will be similarly treated. It's time we took this abomination to the Europen Court of Human Rights and had it denounced for the sham that it is! We need to take action now and stop this 'financial holocaust'!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Exasperated Me | 14 Apr 2011 2:07 pm
This is how it works: FSA insist on an 'Independent Expert Review' which is carried out by KPMG who hand out the work to sub-contractors who are not expert in anything.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 14 Apr 2011 2:11 pm
Exactly Mike.
Hector and the gang totally failed in their own remit and are rewarded with new, enhanced positions.Meanwhile they decide, from their lofty tower, whether or not Park Row advisers are fit for purpose. Apparently they cannot even get that right according to the RDC. Take note David.
Financial holocaust is a strong statement to use but I am inclined to agree with you. We are at their mercy and the rest of the uk stands by bleating about human rights abuse in other countries whilst we face the same every day of our lives.
Having to be interviewed by the fsa must be akin to being interviewed by the ss. They cannot murder you, that much is true, but they do have powers with no accountability that should not be tolerated in a so called democracy. Because of the fsa I am ashamed to be british and unable to speak out against HR issues in other countries. To do so would be sheer hypocracy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Hugh Jeego | 14 Apr 2011 2:19 pm
If the work was given to KPMG who then gave it to someone else to do, how much has KPMG been paid to just pass this on to a firm that obviously cannot cope? These are costs that we are being asked to pay? Is there any chance of me getting my nose in the trough on this one? Seems an easy job with little or no quality control issues. Seriously this is now a "restraint of trade" issue, class act solicitors please note!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Frazer Maul | 14 Apr 2011 3:40 pm
Once again we are missing the point just to FSA bash. Can't you see this type of action, as harsh as it is to those individuals concened, is actually protecting the IFA market from potential disreputable individuals.
I do agree about KPMG but then the so called Big 4 are nothing but Big Billers. I know personally that one of the Big 4 charges admin staff out at £175 per hour, yes per hour, so imagine what the bill is for this.
As for the outsourcing that will indeed be to limited experienced so called ‘contractors’ who specialise in nothing more than basic Endowment and PPI complaints and are clueless when it comes to suitability of advice, conduct of business and products. You certainly won’t find main level 4 qualified individuals in that group of non-experts.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Baron Bolligrew | 14 Apr 2011 3:40 pm
Hold on a minute...let me get this right...the FSA SUMMON Park Row advisers for an interview? So, the people who have not been allowed to work for 18 months, hence have had no income, will have to spend money to attend an inquisition in front of someone who is paid a salary and bonus for screwing up their jobs, propects and lives?
This is farcical!
Why don't the FSA just hold their hands up and admit they've screwed up? No, that would not do would it? The FSA is never wrong...it is therefore omnipotent!
As for KPMG....jobs for the boys isn't it?
I gather that when the FSA 'requests' this kind of audit you have to choose from one of 3 approved firms...each quoting the same fee! Closed shop or what!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment