View more on these topics

Barclays visited by FCA 186 times last year

FCA interior logo 620x430

Barclays was visited by the FCA more than twice as much as the next most-monitored British bank in 2014, according to a Freedom of Information request.

The bank was visited by the regulator 186 times last year, equating to four times a week, Bloomberg discovered. Part of the reason for the visits is the size and complexity of the bank, as Barclays had 48,600 employees at the end of 2014.

HSBC was the next most-visited bank with 85 meetings with the FCA, followed by RBS at 65 and Lloyds with 58 visits. For US banks, Citigroup was visited 57 times, Goldman Sachs 44 times and Deutsche Bank 46 times.

However, the figures may drop next year as Tracey McDermott, who became head of wholesale supervision at the FCA earlier this year, is looking to cut down on routine visits to firms.

Instead, she will focus on comparisons between firms to show good and bad practices.

McDermott told Bloomberg that if the regulator can say to banks “this is what your competitors do and they manage to do it in a profitable and compliant way so you should be able to, that’s much more powerful”.

Earlier this year, complaints data from the FCA showed Barclays was the most complained about bank in the second half of 2014. The bank topped the list despite a 1 per cent drop in complaints on the first half of last year.

Recommended

Europe 2017: Value, large-caps & liquidity

Joshua Ausden, Head of Client Investment Strategy, Neptune Read more here Important Information – for Investment Professionals Only. Not for Retail Clients.Investment risksNeptune funds may have a high volatility rating and past performance and forecasts are not a guide to future performance. These are Neptune’s views and as such this document is deemed to be […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 7 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. They are nearby it nice to see they are good neighbours and call in for a chat and a cup of tea

  2. Dominic Thomas 21st July 2015 at 9:25 am

    Given that market impact for poor systems and controls or bad advice is naturally greater for large institutions, particularly those that are part of the “system”, surely it is only sensible to have a higher degree of focus with Banks…. whilst we can draw some comfort from the fact that the FCA has clearly been highly engaged with Barclays et al, this is presumably after the events that were exposed… (unclear form this item)… it would be more useful and beneficial to clarify how many visits were made pre-crunch and pre-Libor, pre-PPI if indeed the number of visits reflects anything significant.

    Whilst the number of visits is clearly representative of something, it isn’t really clear of what.

  3. When I first saw this headline I assumed it was to arrange an overdraft to meet the final salary pension shortfall

  4. By this article one would have to conclude, if one company (and banks in general) is using up this much resource, and is accountable for so many complaints it should have its licences and authority removed, I cant imagine an IFA being given so much attention, they would have been labelled “not fit and proper” a long time ago and banned from the industry for life.

    At the very least it, should have severe restrictions of trade ?

    I am so angry at the double standards that run so deep, within the FCA,

  5. Wesley Haslett 21st July 2015 at 4:25 pm

    Does not say how many of those visits were job interviews!

  6. not so sure about the role of the regulator in sharing one firm’s competitive advantage away to an under-performing competitor. Need to understand the circumstances behind this more

Leave a comment