FSA names six accredited bodies
Share
The FSA has published the names of the six professional bodies it is likely to grant accredited body status.
In its quarterly consultation paper published today the FSA names the six bodies it intends to grant accredited body status as the CFA Society of the UK, the Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment, the Chartered Institute for Bankers in Scotland, the Chartered Insurance Institute, the Institute of Financial Planning, and the Institute of Financial Services, which is a division of the ifs School of Finance.
The six bodies are subject to consultation.
Accredited bodies will be responsible for issuing advisers with their Statement of Professional Standing, which will certify that advisers have reached the minimum qualification requirements under the RDR.
The organisations awarded accredited body status need to have satisfied the FSA that they act in the public interest and in the further development of the profession, and that they carry out effective verification services.
Accredited bodies will also need to have appropriate systems and controls and co-operate with the regulator on an ongoing basis.
The FSA says: “The criteria is based on what we expect all accredited bodies to demonstrate from December 31, 2012 so the proposed accredited bodies may not have all the appropriate capabilities or systems and controls in place now. As the accredited body role is new, it is very unlikely that any accredited body is 100 per cent ready now.
“We are satisfied that the applicants and their independent auditors have provided sufficient detail about how they expect to implement the appropriate systems and controls between now and December 31, 2012.”
The regulator adds it expects to receive further applications from potential accredited bodies and will consult on any decision to accredit those bodies.
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 (40)
Garry Heath | 6 Jun 2011 12:06 pm
"The Gravy Train is departing from Platform 2"
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Quarrell | 6 Jun 2011 12:10 pm
I thought it went by boat ?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ballbag | 6 Jun 2011 12:16 pm
Another old boy's club to pay for, for those of you who are left.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6 Jun 2011 12:17 pm
Here we go again. Fimbra, lautro, pia, fsa. Same c***, same people different name.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Green Eyed Monster | 6 Jun 2011 12:19 pm
The Gravy Train won't apply to the IFP which is including the service without additonal charge to its membership. Also the membership fees won't be increasing in the forseeable future.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6 Jun 2011 12:32 pm
More costs to pay for and those idiots at Canar Wharf are telling consumers that costs to consumers will not increase due to RDR. These so called interlectuals are living in cuckoo land
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6 Jun 2011 12:32 pm
More costs to pay for and those idiots at Canar Wharf are telling consumers that costs to consumers will not increase due to RDR. These so called interlectuals are living in cuckoo land
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6 Jun 2011 12:32 pm
...... The Gravy Train won't apply to the IFP which is including the service without additonal charge to its membership ........
I feel oh so much better for that!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6 Jun 2011 12:32 pm
Green Eyed Monster - No additional charge to its membership and no increase in fees for the foreseeable future, but there will be no choice but to become a member of one of these accredited bodies in the future.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Ross | 6 Jun 2011 12:42 pm
PFS or CII members will receive their Statement of Professional Standing (SPS) free as part of their membership.
David Ross
CII
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment