View more on these topics

FCA cracks down on 181 financial promotions

The FCA took action on 181 financial promotions in the second half of 2014, data from the regulator reveals.

Figures from the FCA show that in 181 cases, the regulator took action which resulted in promotions being amended or withdrawn by firms.

It says 70 per cent of the cases relate to consumer credit firms, while 23 per cent relate to investments.

Just 1 per cent relate to pensions, and a further 1 per cent to mortgages. It is the first time the FCA has published the data.

However, research by regulatory consultants Bovill published last year found the FCA asked firms to change or withdraw 328 financial promotions in the 12 months to June 2014, up from 204 the previous year.

The FCA says that between 1 July and 31 December 2014, it received 467 complaints about financial promotions.

Of these, 303 were from consumers, 45 were from firms and 119 were referrals from other regulators.

Also today, the regulator has published data on Project Innovate showing it received 83 requests for support in the first two months following the project’s launch.

Its innovation hub, which aims to support firms looking to develop new approaches, launched on 28 October.

The FCA says it has so far offered support to 58 per cent of the 83 requests.

Where the support has been completed, 61 per cent of firms have been given an informal steer to help guide their decision making.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Whilst this is encouraging news, none of these orders to withdraw or amend faulty promotions relate to unregulated products or services, so in respect of those there would appear to remain little if any consumer protection. Why don’t the FCA/Treasury simply outlaw the promotion of all and any unregulated investment schemes?

  2. Frankly, I’m surprised the numbers are so low. A quick internet seach brings up a few suspect websites within a couple of minutes. Obviously there are degrees of ‘badness’.

    I saw a poster for nutmeg on the train this morning and at the bottom it had “authorised and registered by the Financial Conduct Authority” – incorrect wording but no big deal. I found a DFM website within a couple of minutes where they claim to be independent but clearly aren’t (but would have been under the old pre-RDR definition) – not great but not serious. Less than a minute finds a website advertising adverse mortgages (an appointed rep of a large firm) where the quoted APR is the smallest writing on the page – definitely not right.

    Are the FCA just relying on complaints or are they being pro-active on this?

Leave a comment