View more on these topics

Informed Choice sets up action group

Informed Choice has formed an IFA action group to campaign for fairer Financial Services Compensation Scheme costs.

The group was set up after some advisers were hit with huge increases in their FSCS bills. Informed Choice’s bill jumped from £1,300 to £10,012.

The group has set up a website, FSCSlevyactiongroup.co.uk, a Twitter page and a petition which will be presented to FSA chief executive Hector Sants and Treasury financial secretary Mark Hoban on February 17. The group wants greater responsibility placed on IFAs who sell failed products and for the FSA to intervene earlier when high-risk plans are being sold.

It is also calling for a commitment to keep FSCS management expenses to a minimum and, where some firms are found to have missold a product, assurances that firms which did not missell will get a refund on their interim levy contribution.

Informed Choice managing director Martin Bamford last week sent an open letter to the FSA, the FSCS and the Treasury.

Recommended

Equities overtake bonds after best sales in a decade, IMA stats

Equities replaced bonds as the most popular asset class among investors in 2010, attracting net retail sales of £7.5bn in 2010, according to statistics from the Investment Management Association. In 2009 bonds topped the asset class rankings, but according to the IMA sales of equity funds in 2010 were at their highest level since 2000. […]

6

Mortgage broker sues FSA for libel

Mortgage broker Adam Lucas is suing the FSA for libel after the regulator published a decision notice which cancelled his permissions to operate as a broker. The decision notice was issued because the FSA claims Lucas failed to pay £1,349.41 in fees. However Lucas contends that the FSA did not attempt to contact him using […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. For a start, Hoban will wash his hands of any involvement on the usual grounds that the FSA (fsa.gov.uk) is independent of government.

    The FSCS will say that it simply did what the FSA told it to.

    And the FSA will decline to comment or, at best, issue some typical bogwash fob-off statement that means nothing.

    So what’s Plan B in the face of responses such as these?

Leave a comment