FSCS warns of £40m interim levy - £100m limit could be breached
Share
Advisers may face a further interim Financial Services Compensation Scheme levy of at least £40m while the FSCS also warns compensation costs for Arch cru and MF Global could go above the £100m adviser sub-class limit and trigger a cross-subsidy for fund managers.
In its Outlook newsletter published today, FSCS chief executive Mark Neale (pictured) says the scheme may incur higher compensation costs than it estimated in the investment intermediation sub-class in relation to Keydata, Wills and Co and other stockbroking firms.
In the newsletter Neale says: “It is possible these higher costs may cause us to raise an interim levy on the investment intermediation sector this year, although we are not yet able to take a final decision on this.
“Our current projection is that we may face a deficit of at least £40m on investment intermediaries before the next levy becomes available.”
The newsletter also warns there is a potential risk of cross-subsidy if compensation costs for Arch cru and MF Global push investment intermediation costs above the £100m threshold. The FSCS has already levied the investment intermediation sub-class £30m in 2011/12.
The estimated £40m interim levy figure has excluded provisions relating to Arch cru and MF Global, as the FSCS says it currently has no basis for determining these amounts. The scheme has so far received 600 claims against IFAs that are no longer trading.
The FSCS says firms should “treat this estimate with caution” due to the unpredictability of claims volumes.
It will not make a final decision on whether to raise an interim levy until later in the financial year.
The FSCS has also warned that compensation costs in relation to mortgage brokers have also been higher than estimated, and says it has seen a substantial increase in the number of eligible claims.
In January the FSCS raised an interim industry levy of £326m, mainly to cover the compensation costs for Keydata. Advisers paid £93m, while fund firms paid £233m.
MF Global UK, the UK subsidiary of the failed investment brokerage, was placed into special administration in October. A list acquired by Money Marketing through a freedom of information request shows that MF Global UK is in the investment intermediation FSCS sub-class.
In this week’s Money Marketing the FSCS refused to rule out whether IFAs would face a compensation bill for US investors affected by the collapse of MF Global.
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
Related images
Most popular
Most commented
-
Neil Liversidge: Would anyone use 'hard fees' if they didn't have to?
-
Nic Cicutti: Advisers and fund managers need to tackle their charges
-
Providers: Scottish independence could end pension tax relief for millions
-
FCA under pressure to re-think Sipp cap-ad plans
-
Standard Life to pay platform clients' 2013 rebate tax bill
Most emailed
-
Just Retirement to launch long-term care annuity as sales slump
-
BoI reverses mortgage rate hike for 1,200 borrowers
-
Barclays to cut Help to Buy deal by 0.5% and launch lowest-ever 5-year fix
-
Providers: Scottish independence could end pension tax relief for millions
-
Threesixty launches DFM due diligence service
Readers' comments (15)
Chippy Minton | 15 Dec 2011 2:40 pm
Can anyone explain to me what the point of the FSA is. When they fail we pay the bill and they get a bonus.
How about we scrap the FSA and use the money saved to meet the compensation?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
DT | 15 Dec 2011 2:56 pm
Bravo! wouldnt it be easier just to give you guys the keys to the office and do the job for me, take my banking passwords and simply have done with it? and err.. you must be kidding....No.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
huw | 15 Dec 2011 2:57 pm
Would it be possible to find a picture of Mark Neale that doesn't make him look triumphantly smug as I fear for the poor man's safety.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Nick | 15 Dec 2011 2:58 pm
more levies, do they think we are made of money, pathetic!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15 Dec 2011 3:00 pm
How much of this to cover Herbert Smith's inflated fees?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15 Dec 2011 3:09 pm
The FSCS says firms should “treat this estimate with caution” due to the unpredictability of claims volumes.
That is a good basis to start our 2012/2013 business plans then! !!
So how much of our hard earned profits for the next few years do IFA's need to set asside for the "Train Crash" that is comming our way to make up for the failed regulation of firms no longer trading.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Neil F Liversidge | 15 Dec 2011 3:11 pm
This cannot go on. There is clearly no incentive toward prudence. That is the lesson of all the debacles to date. We need to re-think the whole concept of investor compensation.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Gareth E K Smith | 15 Dec 2011 3:31 pm
As Donald Rumsfeld said, there are known, knowns i.e we as IFA's will face vere increasing levies,
known unknowns, i.e we will face the bill for there incompetence over arch cru, key datya and now US MF Global clients, future of legacy/trail commission
and finally unknown, unknowns .ie what is the point of being an IFA, spiralling costs, RDR implications reviews of business that today meets compliance requirement but at the drop of an hat in the future the FSA can claim as bad advice, also is there a big event just waiting to happen to blow us all out of the water and bankrupt us in the process.
Reality this is no no joke in the past I have just got on with it and paid the bill I'm faced with, well finally my own patience has snapped and as of tonight i will be composing a letter to my MP and asking him his opinions as something needs to be done namely who regulates the regulator.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andrew Moore | 15 Dec 2011 3:48 pm
Am I reading this right. UK IFA's could be liable for compensating US Investors?
"FSCS refused to rule out whether IFAs would face a compensation bill for US investors affected by the collapse of MF Global"
Am I dreaming this? How have we got to the point of being on the hook for virtually anybody that goes bust.
My clients and I can't keep paying extra fees for this kind of collective responsibility. We have no influence over these matters, its like financial fly tipping!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
hugh jeego | 15 Dec 2011 4:15 pm
Rumour has it the FSCS has agreed, off the record, to accept claims for compensation from Greek citizens who own bars in Greece that will not be frequented by IFA`s anymore because we cannot afford any further costs either business wise or personally.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment