View more on these topics

Advisers frustrated by LEI applications under Mifid II

LEI applicationsAdvisers have been urged to shop around if they need a Legal
Entity Identifier under Mifid II as fears have been raised that scam companies could take advantage of the market.

LEIs will be required where the client is not an individual, for example if they are acting under a legal entity or structure such as a company, charity or trust.

Many firms are currently applying for LEIs to make sure they
are compliant with plenty of time ahead of July. The deadline for firms to have LEI’s for their clients was initially 3 January but this was extended by six months by the European Securities and Markets Authority.

However, advisers have cited frustrations with the application process.

One adviser, Montgo Consulting director Mike Grant, says he grew
frustrated with the application process when he tried to register
through the London Stock Exchange for a code. The LSE was charging £138
including VAT for registration.

He says: “I struggled to navigate my way through a highly complex and
confusing process and gave up after two attempts.”

Grant turned to a fellow IFA for advice and was recommended a German
company EQS. Not only was it less than half the price, but the process
was much easier, he says.

“The contrast could not have been starker. The website was very user
friendly, intuitive and the application was simple and quick.”

Grant paid a fee of £51.56 to EQS and says he had the LEI within two hours.

EQS deputy managing director for Germany Sven Schenkluhn says: “We do
the same thing as LSE but we are the cheapest in Europe while [the LSE] is
one of the most expensive.”

London Stock Exchange Group declined to comment.

Advisers also have to pay an annual fee to renew their LEIs which is
£60 with EQS and £84 a year with LSE including VAT.

LSE and EQS are two of fewer than 25 Local Operating Units worldwide that can issue LEIs.

Zero Support managing director Phil Young says: “It is vital that IFAs
check that they are dealing with a credible company as it is possible
that we could see scam sites being set up.

“Also advisers should check that they are not dealing with a white
label or agent of an LOU and paying more than necessary for the same
service because that agent takes its own fee.”

Financial advisers should also notify any SSAS clients on their books
that they will need an LEI and of the cost of the different
registration options available.

Hargreaves Lansdown chartered financial planner Danny Cox says the
firm has written to clients who are affected.

He adds: “It’s unfortunate that limited numbers of clients are faced
with hoops to jump through and additional cost, as part of the twin
aims of greater transparency and investor protection under MiFid II.”



Berkeley Burke faces legal action from 77 investors

A group of nearly 80 investors has cleared the first obstacle in legal action against Berkeley Burke over allegations it was responsible for losses incurred from risky investments. A judge’s decision published online relates to a group litigation order brought on behalf of investors who accuse Berkeley Burke Sipp Administration of “mis-selling” them self-invested personal pensions. […]


Old Mutual Wealth: Getting to the bottom of negative transaction costs

Old Mutual Wealth‘s Jeremy Mugridge explains why some transaction costs appear as a negative figure on a platform, following a Money Marketing article this week The regulatory regime brought in by Mifid II and Priips is beginning to bed in, and some of the more bizarre implications of the vast legislation are beginning to pop […]


British Steel adviser explains ongoing charges calculation to MPs

Active Wealth director Darren Reynolds has emphasised that ongoing adviser charges for British Steel clients have not been calculated as a percentage of their funds. In a letter addressed to work and pensions select committee chairman and MP Frank Field, Reynolds reveals more details about the way approximately 300 British Steel clients were advised by […]


Minimal compliance: Is it enough?

Along with global legal practice Eversheds Sutherland, we look at why employers may want to do more than simply meet the legal minimum in terms of their auto-enrolment duties. Our new policy paper — ‘Automatic enrolment and the law – how far do employers’ duties extend?’ — summarises current minimum duties of employers to enrol […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I used the London S E found it simple paid the fee and received my LEI directly, no Fuss !! Not sure why others have found it difficult

  2. more money to pay out for old rope

  3. Without wishing to state the obvious, SSASs (and corporate clients, Trusts etc) only need an LEI at the point they intend to trade Exchange Traded Instruments.

  4. LSE might decline to comment, but frankly they should explain themselves.

  5. Spot On, Paul White, there is so much mis-information out there with people probably reading articles on line and not the finer print of the rule and telling all Entities they need an LEI and wasting their money when they don’t trade in the types of ‘instruments’ that require one.

Leave a comment