Response to editor’s online view, headlined, FSA must ignore lender pleas over non-advised ban

I fully understand many of the comments regarding the removal of choice.

However, there is a very real risk that without this ban, bank staff will steer customers towards products that are inappropriate, without any recourse when things go wrong.

For instance, I recently had a client who, during our meeting, stated that they were keen to have a fixed-rate product because they did not want to accept the risk of potential interest rate changes.

However, upon visiting their local branch of HSBC, the mortgage arranger stated that they would be better going on a tracker product because interest rates were not going to increase any time soon.

Having worked for the aforementioned lender, along with several others, it cannot be questioned that these practices are commonplace.
If an adviser made these statements and then things went pear-shaped, there would be reason to complain but if you go down the non-advised route, where would clients go?

I am not big on over-regulation but it is clear that there are certain areas that definitely need to be addressed.

Name supplied