View more on these topics

FSA to become Bank of England subsidiary

The FSA is to fall under the control of the Bank of England with a separate Consumer Protection Agency set up to regulate IFAs.

Chancellor George Osborne is set to reveal the restructure in his first Mansion House speech this Wednesday, according to a blog from the BBC’s business editor Robert Peston.

Peston says the Chancellor is also set to announce the separation of the FSA’s consumer protection activities into a new body called the Consumer Protection Agency, as proposed by the Conservative Party before the election. Enforcement activities are also set to be hived off to create a new Economic Crime Agency. The CPA would oversee regulation of IFAs.

The reform will mean that the part of the FSA that monitors banks, insurers and other financial institutions will become part of the Bank of England, though the regulator is expected to retain its own board.

The Bank of England will also set up a new Financial Policy Committee made up of executives from the Bank of England and senior representatives from the FSA.

The committee will be responsible for maintaining financial stability, and will use macro-prudential tools to prevent banks from offering credit when the economy overheats.

It had been thought that the FSA’s regulatory role would be retained following the coalition Government’s Programme for government document, which made no mention of plans for the FSA.

Despite the Conservatives long-held ambition to dismantle the FSA and hand power back to the Bank of England, the coalition’s Programme for government only referred to plans to “give the Bank of England control of macro-prudential regulation and oversight of micro-prudential regulation.” This was widely interpreted to mean that the FSA would be preserved.

Handing control back to the Bank of England would see a reversal of Gordon Brown’s decision in 1997 to take banking supervision from the Bank of England and merge it with other City regulatory bodies to set up the FSA.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 30 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Now at last we may get some sort of control over this profligate bunch of muppets

  2. Here we go again…

  3. Why do I have a sense of foreboding about this vague set of intents?

  4. Although this looks like it could be good for small firms, unless there are wholesale changes in staff and recruitment standards it won’t change anything apart from their name.

    I really hope this opportunity is taken to get rid of the overpaid incompetent bureaucrats and that all staff have to apply for a job using proper external recruitment process, unlikely though.

  5. So now the banks can Regulate themselves.

    End of career for a lot of ur methinks

  6. Same old, same old 14th June 2010 at 9:29 am

    So we will end up with the same people in the same location doing the same things earning the same salaries under a different letterhead.

    Its just that one of Mr Cameron’s cronies will have earned a fortune re-designing the logo and reprinting the stationery.

    So for all your hope … no real change

  7. More expense as all IFAs will now be requiring new stationery then? Will the regulatory fees we have to pay this year be reduced to compensate or will all these costs be borne by IFAs again? It will be worth it though to see the back of the inefficiencies of the FSA!

  8. I thought we were trying to cut costs, the costs of this change, setting it up, drafting the legislation, policies, procedures etc etc, then the subsequent cost to us in the industry such as of changing biz cards, headed paper, website etc will be massive – not doubt all the whingers on here will moan about this, then they’ll start moaning about the new CPA organisation because the real beef with you people isn’t with the FSA it is with anyone who reigns you in from ripping people off.

  9. Richard Wilson 14th June 2010 at 9:36 am

    Sounds to me as though we will still have a regulatory regime for IFA’s run by bankers.

    I expect also that we as IFA’s will have to pay for it in some form or another.

    No real change there then.

  10. Ellen Crabtree 14th June 2010 at 9:38 am

    Isn’t this just a complete volte face? Oh but the Tories are past masters at that. How much is this going to cost taxpayers, to achieve…what?

  11. With salaries like theirs I guess it is only right and proper that they join a bank!

  12. Gain control? Save costs?

    Don’t hold your breath John.

    Just the same muppets, but a different name.

  13. The Mist begins to clear 14th June 2010 at 9:48 am

    So, we now know why the MD Risk needed to resign…..the bizarre excuse of not wanting Sants job…or was it her office furniture is the wrong colour or not large enough for her ego? Whatever, another example of the actions by people who care only for themselves…

    Maybe, just maybe the regulator is about to be regulated AT LAST……

  14. So, the best possible outcome of this announcement is that IFAs bear the cost of setting up a new unitary regulator? Other possible outcomes still include ‘twin peaks’ regulation – prudential and conduct by two different agencies – which would be REALLY bad news.

    Don’t know why anyone thinks that putting BoE in charge will be an improvement – you just have to look at the report on the performance of the Irish central bank during the credit crunch…

  15. This is the worst kept secret ever.

    A friend of mine who works their told me that the FSA were simply changing over to become the CPA. Same people – same jobs – different lable.

    The worrying thing for me is how the internal jobs market works . My friend – lovely fellow he is – started out in the logistics office, moving furniture from FSA office to FSA office. He is now already working for the CPA in an office!

    Until all the people at the FSA/CPA or what ever other title they call themselves, are forced to pass exactly the same exams as us, I really fail to see how they can have the legitamacy to regulate us.

  16. Peston, the Oracle..

  17. i wish everyone would wake up and smell the coffee. I was never going to make any difference who ever was in power because no one in politics has any understanding of what is going on at the grass roots of what we as advisers do on a daily basis. The bureaucracy that is now within Financial services is farcical and it is dressed up in the name of “consumer protection”. It’s been so successful that there are no bad apples in our industry .. I think not. We need to be realistic that this is not a perfect world and every industry has a workforce where some are better than others, some are more expensive than others, but as grown up adults we do our research, we listen to a recommendation and we use the services of who we have a gut instinct for, this is usually the best method, however sometimes it back fires. But what ever the method we take responsibility for our own decisions and actions. Financial Services is the only industry which has been strangled by paperwork. The FSA want to create robots out of advisers so that we all do the same thing in the same order with the same outcome at the same cost. I used to see all my customers at least once a year. That may have been only for 15 – 30 minutes but it enabled me to keep contact and nip anything in the bud and point out on areas where the client may need further advise. Now I spend all day filling in forms to justify what I am doing. There is more damage being done by the number of people who never get to see an adviser and are therefore lacking in protection cover than there is in miss-selling.

    I started out in financial services in 1984 and I am 100 % certain that all this bureaucracy does not make for a better / safer financial system. We already have “English Law” that can deal with fraud and blatant bad advice. Scrap the whole system and let us advisers do what we do best, seeing clients and providing them with professional advise. So back to my opening line about politicians not knowing what we do, I suggest a politician spend a week with an adviser, and I mean a normal adviser not some high flyer who works with clients on £200K + pa and has administrators who make his appointments, prepare the paperwork and finalise the paperwork after he/she has seen the client. Most of us do all the work ourselves and are dealing with people on £20K pa.

  18. I cant wait to see the back of the FSA. They always said that theirs was a one size does not fit all approach but for years we as IFA have been bearing the brunt of a one size fits all regime with all the crap that goes with it. At last we get our own set of rules. Check Money Management stats recently on complaints etc. IFA community were the group of professionals with the lowest compalints (by a country mile) across the industry. As long as the CPA will take things like thin on board, we should see substantial regulatory cost reduction over time and a set of bespoke rules that should make sense to all of us. God help all of us though if morons at FSA decide they want to apply and get the jobs at the CPA. It really will be time to then pull the shutters and leave because this change will be here for a long time to come. Chris Cummings, its time to get AIFA moving big time NOW, getting in at grass roots level and lobbying for the proper and cost effective way in which we should be properly regulated over, not dictated over. We need sensible people in CPA with commercial awareness and statutory responsibilities to ensure the industry thrives and help us rebuild the profession after 10 years of hammering and pounding by the FSA and FOS as well as protect clients. The industry is shattered and our profession is a shadow of its former self and the public are no better off in general now than before FSA was ever dreamed of, despite their 10 years of rule. If this done properly (& it is a big word for only 2 letters) it will be the best thing to have happened to our profession in 20 years. If not not, then as the saying goes, its goodnight Irene.

  19. Bet the Vote for Tories brigade are glad they voted for Tories now – NOT. We already have the head of the FSA earning £750,000 what is the head of the other two new agencies going to earn? Ths is going ot cost the taxpayers even more money, how are we reducing the deficit here? More jobs for the boys and the taxpayer will pay for it. Superb, what a disaster this is going to be. This is the IFA market’s worse nightmare. I can see years more of pain for IFA’s and Mortgage Brokers alike. What a nightmare.

  20. The regulated attack the regulators, the regulators attack the regulated.

    During all this ‘tit for tat’ the banks fall over, Equitable Life sinks and Keydata becomes the biggest con job for a while.

    Can anyone see the point of all this? What have the regulators and the regulated done for society? The UK savings culture is dead and buried, there are more ‘victims’ and ‘scandals’ than there ever have been… what a waste of time.

  21. I have to say the Tories and Lib Dems really seem to want to stick the knife in to this industry – espeically with their plan for ‘free’ financial advice. There are already services like CAB, FSA generic guides e.tc…debt counselling e.t.c available. I’m sure after George Osborne’s budget we’ll have even less to smile about. Think they will do whatever they want with excuse of blaming previous government when it all goes awry.

  22. A new employer will mean new contracts of employment so let us hope fervently that close attention is paid to just what goes into them ~ no more bonuses, salaries brought down to typical public sector levels, no golden parachutes for failure, no reckless disregard for expense limits. Plus, of course, a whole new set of rules for this new regulator ~ no more works of art, no more vast sums frittered away on outside consultation exercises, much economic premises, an enforceable obligation to operate in accordance with the Statutory Code of Practice For Regulators, and so on.

    A great deal could be achieved if this is done and supervised properly, and maybe even the costs won’t be dumped disproportionately on IFA’s ~ there’ll still be the bank financial products retail sector to be regulated. So don’t write it all off as a waste of money just yet.

  23. A new IFA practice starting from scratch hasn’t a chance without substantial capital to get started. The present and future business models are totally unviable due to the cost of bureacratic procedures and red tape. Will the new regime start cutting these costs so that we can be more viable, acceptable and affordeable to ordinary folk!!

  24. Cannot understand the doom/gloom perspective earlier in this link.

    The FSA will come under the Bank of England in terms of bank regulation-a justifiable reflection of the FSA’s failure in this area

    Yes it is likely that the staff further down the food chain in the FSA will be offered jobs in the CPA; why not? I have posted before that my experience (and surely other people’s) with the rank and file of the FSA has normally been good; they are in the main helpful and pleasant people. The Chief Executive is on the way out anyway and one assumes the CPA will be headed up by some new and perhaps more acceptable faces-and they will be overseeing IFAs.

    Agree some lobbying would be prudent in terms of relationship and as far as possible objectives of the new regulator but what more do you want?

  25. Same shit different day.

  26. So….

    if the BoE looks after prudential issues of banks and insurers and if the new Consumer Protection Agency looks after Conduct issues…who EXACTLY looks after conduct issues within banks?

  27. @ wooden spoon: That would be EXACTLY the putative CPA.

    Not a good time to be a mortgage lender – prudential regulator telling you to reduce your exposures OR ELSE and the conduct regulator telling you to stop reposessing so quick OR ELSE… I’m sure readers can think up other instances where twin peaks regulation really won’t work at all well.

  28. The real IFA’s out there need to get together and lobby goverment themselves instead of leaving suits to do it for them. Here is your chance guys- but I am feeling a tad optimistic methinks…

  29. Peter L. Griffiths. 14th December 2010 at 4:54 pm

    A little known responsibility of the Bank of England at least prior to 1997 was the solvency of the banking system. This responsibility seems to have been lost with the much acclaimed independence of the Bank of England. The rest is history.

  30. Update . FEB 7 th 2011

    Nov.23 – – -Nov.26 th. 2010.
    The following sent to – – – – 312- – Lords – – – – – – House of Lords.
    The following sent to – – – – 649 – – M.P.’s – – – – – House of Commons.

    SWISS BANK PARTNERS IN CRIMES.

    Pictet & Cie Bank.

    Ivan Pictet.
    Charles Pictet.
    Nicolas Pictet.
    Jacques de Saussure.
    Jean – Francois Demole.
    Renaud de Planta.
    Philippe Bertherat..

    Pictet & Cie.- claim they are the “Rolls Royce”of Swiss banks.

    Swiss Banks or more correctly Swizz banks.

    Swizz. —- “ a great disappointment.” or a “ fraud.”

    Fraud. —“ an intentional deception or dishonesty.”— “a crime.”

    Crime. —“ an act committed or omitted in violation of a law.”

    Serious Crimes .
    Conspiring to pervert the Course of Justice.
    Perverting the Course of Justice.
    Contempt of Court.

    Pictet & Cie Bank –Partners –(1996—2010)—guilty.
    Peters &Peters – Partners.— (1999—2010)— guilty.

    The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld crucial documents requested under a High Court order. The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld evidence from the Police, and one of it’s account managers Susan Broadhead gave a false witness statement to the Police.
    Another one of it’s managers Nicholas Campiche ( Now Head of Pictet – Alternative Investments.) concocted a letter pretending to be a client and closed his account. The senior partner (Ivan Pictet.) sought to have numerous documents destroyed,along with those copies held in their London office’s of Pictet Asset Management. Initially stating that they were forgeries then their lawyers Peters & Peters – Monty Raphael –and the barrister Charles Flint.Q.C. later had to admit in Court that the documents were genuine.

    British Parliament. Hansard .29th March 2007.
    Barry Sheerman .M.P.—quote.

    ———“ Constituents of mine have lost £2 million through fraud. The fraudster used Pictet & Cie – – a French Bank – – and Pictet Asset Management to back the fraud being perpetrated.””

    (1) It is a criminal offence for a bank to knowingly act for an undischarged criminal bankrupt in so far as it seeks to assist that criminal bankrupt in the fraudulent movement of monies. ( Money Laundering.)

    (2) It is a criminal offence for a bank to lie to the police and the bankrupts trustee in bankruptcy in so far as any knowledge of, or dealings with the bank was refuted .

    (3) A bank can be guilty of Contempt of Court if it fails to comply fully with the Courts order for discovery .

    (4) The banks contempt is further compounded if it fails to address its error after it is specifically drawn to the to its solicitors attention. ( Monty Raphael).

    (5) It is a criminal offence under the Financial Services Act to seek to destroy evidence that might be relevant to an investigation .

    (6) It is a criminal offence not to relinquish control of funds to the Trustee immediately the fact of the bankruptcy is drawn to the banks attention.

    (7) It is a criminal offence to lie or otherwise obfuscate the lawful and proper enquiries of the F.S.A.

    In the F.S.A. cover up , they concluded that there had been “ Rogue” elements in Pictet & Cie’s , London operations . They had been moved from their London Office so who was there left to prosecute. “ Unbelievable.”

    On Dec 9th,2008. the complaint was sent to 150 Members of the House Of Lords and 230 Members of Parliament.

    *** We thank –David Cameron. M.P. ( Canary Wharf Speech.) Dec. 15th. 2008.
    Now— PRIME MINISTER.

    (1) Bankers who behave irresponsibly should face professional consequences.
    (2) If anyone is found to have behaved criminally they must be prosecuted.
    (3) The F.S.A and the Serious Fraud Office should be following up every lead,
    investigating every suspect transaction .
    (4) We need to make it 100% clear –those who break the law should face
    prosecution.
    (5) That we make sure we root out any wrongdoing that may have happened, whoever
    is involved, however high or well connected they may be.

    Ivan Pictet.
    Managing partner in Pictet & Cie Bank . — retiring -?. 2010.
    President of the Geneva Financial Centre. —stepping down -2010. ?
    World Bank.committee member.—- ?
    United Nations. Investment Committee member,
    Vice President – Global Humanitarian Forum. — redundant.2010.?
    Member of the Henokiens.
    Blackstone Group — Board Member.
    Past- President – Geneva Private Bankers association.
    Past –President – Geneva Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

    Monty Raphael. ( Peters & Peters.)
    Quote.” —- Doyen of U.K. Fraud lawyers.
    Head of Fraud and Regulatory Dept. —- stepping down, –2009.? Director of the Fraud Advisory panel.
    Member of the Law Society of England & Wales.
    International Bar Association Member.

    Written Parliamentary Questions received by the table office ..

    (1) To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to ensure that Swiss Banks such as Pictet & Cie do not evade criminal prosecution under EU law even when the illegal act is committed by a London based subsidiary.

    (2)To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to protect the rights of UK citizens who seek redress following criminal activities by Swiss banks with subsidiary offices located in London.

    On Dec 9th,2008. the complaint was sent to 150 Members of the House Of Lords and 230 Members of Parliament.
    On Aug 19th.2009.another complainants file regarding the “cover up” was forwarded to the same 380 members.

    We started our campaign in June 2008 — via the “net” to highlight our fight to get “justice”. In our second year campaign we hoped to reveal further damning evidence . Due to there being an on going Police investigation into our complaint we are at this moment unable to place dozens of documents on to the “net”. Again we thank other “ E- Mailers” for their information in relation to our campaign.

    Quote. ( America’s Top Lawyer .)
    You can be the richest man in the world with the best lawyers that money can buy but you cannot win against a man who has got nothing left to lose and is telling the truth.

    Truth Hurts.
    Ivan Pictet. Announces stepping down from Pictet & Cie. 5th Feb 2010.
    Stepping Down—President of Geneva Financial centre.—2010.
    Monty Raphael. Steps down as head . May. 2009.

    *** We note that there has been a sharp increase in Peters & Peters partners leaving to go to other practices. Moving does not alleviate them of any responsibility from any illegalities that may have occurred at Peters & Peters during their partnership tenure. From 1999 onwards.

    *** Were currently waiting to see if the Police and other Law Enforcement Bodies attempt to cover this case up like their F.S.A. counterparts. If they do –“ then watch this space.”

    We were informed that due to pressure from our M.P. that the Ministry of Justice have asked Lord Myners to investigate our claims that the F.S.A. covered up the illegal activities of Pictet Asset Management. London. We might as well have asked Ivan Pictet to investigate or someone from FRIENDS RE-UNITED.

    The consensus of opinion is the Pictet & Cie should be prosecuted , and that their U.K. banking licence should be taken away.

    Their Solicitors at Peters & Peters .London “ struck off and prosecuted..”

    *** Started campaign — June 6th.2008.
    2 .5 years —- approx 2 .5 million e-mails – – – but still no writs, injunctions or threats of litigation – – – WHY – – – because it is all true.

    *** . The bigger they are — the harder they fall.!!!

    In America —- they would have all been in prison for the last seven years.

    Nov.23rd –Nov.26th. 2010 .

    The above sent to —— 312 – – Lords – – – House of Lords.
    The above sent to — –649 – – M.P.’s – – – House of Commons._

    Full Story.

    Go to search box on “Google” and insert ( Peters & Peters/ Pictet & Cie.)

    or go to ” Google ” and insert any of the following combinations.

    Insert– ( Jacques de Saussure/ Monty Raphael.)
    Insert– ( Ivan Pictet / Monty Raphael.)
    Insert– ( Pictet & Cie /Monty Raphael.)
    Insert– ( Charles Flint. Q.C./ Monty Raphael.)
    Insert– ( Nicholas Campiche / Susan Broadhead.)
    Insert– ( F.S.A. / Monty Raphael.)
    Insert –( F.S.A. / Pictet & Cie.)
    Insert –( Hansard /Ivan Pictet.)

Leave a comment