View more on these topics

Hector Sants apologises for rejection of TSC RDR report

FSA chief executive Hector Sants has apologised for the regulator’s pre-emptive rejection of the Treasury select committee’s report into the retail distribution review.

The TSC’s report into the RDR, released in July, calls for the January 1, 2013 implementation date to be delayed by a year to give advisers more time to meet the QCF level four qualification requirements, alongside a softening of the cliff-edge deadline for experienced advisers.

The FSA released an embargoed response alongside publication of the report rejecting the MPs’ key recommendation and stating it is committed to the January 1, 2013 deadline.

Giving evidence to the committee this morning, Sants said media pressure lead to the FSA’s statement.

He said: “I am extremely sorry if the impression we treated this committee with contempt has arisen. The press release was somewhat clumsily worded, it was reacting to media pressure. But that does not in any way reflect my, or the FSA’s, commitment to full accountability to this group.

“It was unfortunate timing to release the report with the summer coming up, we were concerned the press were going to report it as RDR delayed, that the media were going to run stories about the RDR being killed and that preparations were going to be disrupted and the option of careful consideration of your recommendations would have been removed for us.”

TSC members have attacked the move. Labour MP George Mudie accused the FSA of “arrogance” adding that it demonstrated the regulator’s lack of accountability. Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom said it showed contempt for the work of the committee.

TSC chair and Conservative MP Andrew Tyrie wrote a letter to FSA chief executive Hector Sants slamming the pre-emptive response saying it showed no adequate consideration” had been given to the report. Sants wrote back to assure the committee it was taking its recommendation seriously.

The FSA has since submitted its formal response to the committee’s report but the TSC has yet to release it.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 29 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. How many IFAs who haven’t started studying will add a snotty comment?

    My guess is 20 today!

  2. He`s lining up his next job by the sound of it. Crafty little bugger!

  3. How about apologising to the IFA community that you are totally destroying Hector! One day you will be accountable and responsible for your actions.

  4. I would suggest that most IFA’s who have not studied are smarter, by sticking with mortgage and protection.

    Why bust a gut to pass an exam to make no money or increase income.

    Look forward to all the gnashing of teeth a year from now when people start moaning they were rail roaded into this.

  5. Crocodile tears, that’s all it is. And if I thought Pants was really sorry, I’d send him a clean hankie.
    (Oh and I do have sufficient relevant qualifications)

  6. Anonymous@ 11;48 not man enough to use your real name? I suppose you think Sants breaking rules by ignoring an embargo and being unacountable has something to do with IFA’s study???
    Plonker!

  7. To Mr Snotty anon coward. I have completed my level 4 and been adviser charging for several years.

    My comment to Mr Sants is that when Charles the 1st ignored Parliament, they chopped off his HEAD.

    Is Mr Sants going to appolgise for committing (videoed on the record) to the TSC to look favourably at the Longstop issue again?

    If not and this is goiung to drag on and on, then two can play at the game of putting people outside the protection of the law.

    It’s time for F pack staff and politicians to find out about the Longstop issues (especailly as the ministry of justice under Jack straw was discussing a reduction in the longstop for solicitors, accountants and everyone else to 10 years two years ago)

    You cannot ignore the issue F-pack staff, either condemn your employer or you are condoning it and you will reap what you sow in due course.

  8. It does not alter the fact that the FSA can ignore the TSC if it so chooses!

  9. I accidentally nearly commented on the embargoed report and the editor at MM kindly remove it to aboid embarressment. One wonders why the FSAs response to the embargoed TSC report was allowed to be published. If we were talking court proceedings this would be contempt of court. But of course, the FSA answers to no one and no-one at the FSA has accepted responsibility or been punished for NOT checking whether their response was being sent early.
    If this had been an IFA firm, whetehr loss had occurred or not, as well read now, the FSA would impose a fine.
    Hector should go, he has lost any rspect I might have had for him. Return to your banking budies and forget the Knighthood.

  10. He’s only sorry he got caught with his pants down. Generally if you are sorry about something, you have the good grace to say so at the time and not months afterwards.

  11. The only reason the RDR is still going ahead in its current lemming style, cliff edge format is because the FSA staff who dreamed up this debacle, do not want to “lose face” as one committee member put it some time ago.

    In the middle of one of the worst downturns in economic activity world wide, the increasing costs associated with this completely unnecessary draconian changes to our industry, which by the looks of it will be superceded by Mifid2 (or whatever acronym the EU uses) will overwhelm our IFA sector and reduce numbers to an unsustainable level, those that are left will see reduce profits, possibly have to leave the industry (regardless of qualifications) because it will soon no longer be viable to offer IFA services to the general public in any form. Only the well off and wealthy will be able to afford our services and even then may baulk and go pale at the potential fee costs of taking advice and implementing plans.

    It’s not only non level 4 IFAs who are wondering whether they will still have a business worth anything after the cliff edge, a number of Life and Investment firms are looking at selling up, amalgamating or just ceasing trading from the impression and comments I have from various trade sources. (no names no pack drill)

    RDR has no potential winners and the most disadvantaged are going to be the consumer of retail financial investment and protection products.

    Stepping back from the cliff edge would have been sensible, by driving us all before him, Sants and his executives will never admit they got it wrong, it is all the fault of those nasty precocious and irritating IFAs who would not work closely to achieve their bizarre objectives and view of how financial advice, products and services should be provided.

    Pity the consumer I say.

    Me – IFA for 21 yrs, just over 2 yrs to state pension and looking to bail out if this all goes pear shaped. Pity I don’t have an index linked gold plated pension, but I do have adequate resources for my needs in future.

  12. Anonymous@11:48
    Many of us have been studying for decades.

  13. When has the FSA been afraid of anyone or anything?

    Sants and Co. were doing their usual trick of sticking two fingers up to anyone who has the audacity to disagree with them.

    You don’t give a damn about parliament, the industry or the general public.

    Resign now Mr Sants.

  14. Being ‘extremely sorry about the impression’ the FSA’s response gave is NOT the same as a simple ‘SORRY’, is it?.

    That’s like a burglar saying ‘Sorry if you think I left your house in a mess’.

    Also, if you remember from the Hants & Nicol parliament broadcast back in March (otherwise referred to as ‘Mr & Mrs’!), Hants was not entirely sure to whom the FSA were accountable….

    Well, we now know. It’s NOT the banks (although they are a close second of course….)

    No, it’s the MEDIA, obviously!!!.

  15. For an insight into what the well-off think of IFAs, take a look at Michael Holroyd’s article in Saturday’s Times “I might as well have stuffed it under the bed” in Opinion.

  16. What is Hector Sants actually saying sorry for?
    Does anyone know?
    If he is sorry, surely he needs to say;
    1. What he is actually sorry for
    2. What he would have done differently if time was reversed.

    Without that, this is like going to church regularly and asking for confession and then doing the same old thing over and over again….

    Next he will be buying indulgancies!

    This is the man who we are forced to pay a salary with NO right to set the rate. Evene when the government who put him in power is ousted remains in post and then has the front to waive his bonus and give it to a charity of HIS choice, rather than return it to those he has taken it from (with menaces) and ask them to give it to charities of THEIR choice, which might JUST have been acceptable.
    I hear another cry from the 1980’s. Stand down…. Hector this time.

  17. @anonymous

    Guys like you get right up my nose. Come out from behind the screens and use your real name if you feel strongly about anything.

    You think that qualifications are the b all and end all of life. They are not. I have been advising for 30 years now and having recently attended a two day revision course on JO5 many of the young graduate types were great at answering technical questions but poor at applying the skills they had learned.

    It is only part of the equation and to keep beating the drum about qualifications drives me to despair.

    Most good advisors just don’t like the idea of being constantly told what to do and how to do it. If I had wanted such a life I would have joined the army!

  18. I wonder if Mr Sants would be so cocky if he could be held responsible for all HIS MISTAKES?

    Agree with Bob Donandlson anonymous people are hiding behind the skirts of fear they may get found out. If we all were anonymous then we gain nothing.

    Hide and cower all you like but don’t expect anyone taking you seriously.

  19. u were nearly right anon almost 20 unqualified moaning ifas emailing today…

  20. the exams and all the rest of the anonymous bulls#it is completely irrelevant.

    This is about a complete lack of accountability, legal process and a systemic breach of human rights.

    Why did it take the FSA about 4 hours to completely refute the TSC’s proposals out of hand and then 4 months to ‘admit’ they got it wrong.

    Media pressure apparently, mmm – more bulls#it!

  21. I find it somewhat disingenuous for Sants to claim that the FSA’s rushed rejection of the TSC’s call was due to fear of the media mis-reporting that the RDR has been either delayed or killed off. Surely, given that NOBODY has made any such statement, no media channel would publish such a report without first seeking from the FSA either confirmation or denial?

    And, in the face of such an enquiry, all the FSA would have needed to say was that, with all due respect to the TSC, it wants to give the proposal proper consideration before responding appropriately. After all, whilst the FSA can often be accused of steamrollering through its agenda, what it can rarely, if ever, be accused of is rushing anything.

    Sants’ explanation simply doesn’t hold water.

  22. can all the moaning ifas who say its not about passing the exams that is the problem pass the exams please…

    why should others put in the time, effort and money when u think u dont have to..

  23. @ Sam Trego

    You naive fool !

  24. ouch!

    im telling my mum u called me a fool, good luck with the studying derek

  25. @ Sam Trego
    1. Who are you as you are not on the FSA register as far as I can see.
    2. I have passed my exams.
    3. Whilst I might not be able to type having not been tuaght and had to self teach that and using computers, like Bob Donaldson, there are some skills we have which compliment those of younger people.
    4. I am just about to leave for a jobs fair with a view to taking on a graduate. So we can learn from each other.
    5. The FS industry will be poorer for those advisers lost to it due to RDR blindness and FSA willful ignorance.

  26. @ Sam Trego

    I’m far too polite to enter into real dialogue Sam !

    Like I said foolish and naive in the extreme

  27. Jeez, it’s no wonder I stopped reading this website. With just over a year to go until the RDR deadline, we still have IFAs railing against the new regime. It’s happening, guys, whether you like it or not. Move with the times or move on – it really is that simple.

  28. What’s up Hector? Frightened for your job?

    (Another IFA with better qualifications than needed post RDR)

  29. What do exams have to do with Hector being rude and unaccountable?

Leave a comment