View more on these topics

Reasons to be cheerful

Two of the fundamental principles on which life products are based will be overhauled when the FSA reviews with-profits.

The regulator will look at the concepts of policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations and financial strength as it moves to address some of the bigger financial services issues to hit the headlines over the last year.

The definition of policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations was at the centre of the case brought by the Consumers&#39 Association on behalf of policyholders against Axa over the distribution of orphan assets. It is also key to the debate over cross-subsidisation under with-profits stakeholder pensions.

The regulator&#39s failure to monitor financial strength properly is widely seen as having allowed the Equitable Life debacle to get out of hand.

Speaking at the Money Marketing IFA UK conference in London earlier this month, FSA head of department in the investment business division (PIA firms) John Liver said the FSA sees the need for greater definition of the meaning of policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations.

He said: “We will review with-profits but we are not saying with-profits has no place. We see smoothing having a place in the future.”

The FSA inquiry will look at the exercising of discretion over policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations, the transparency of that discretion and the clarity of what information consumers receive.

Punter Southall principal Stephen Leake says: “With Equitable, they created subdivisions of expectations. People should know what an insurance company&#39s policy on setting bonuses actually is. If there was greater transparency around how bonuses were actually arrived at, then it would take some of the mystique out of the situation.”

The issue of the subdivision of policyholders and their expectations resurfaced again last week when barristers appointed by Equitable reported that non-guaranteed annuity policyholders could pursue their own legal remedies to challenge the interests of guaranteed annuity policyholders. It is hoped greater clarification of these core definitions will reduce the potential for litigation in the future.

CA senior policy adviser Mick McAteer points out that one of the key weaknesses the association has identified is that it is up to actuaries and the boards of life companies to decide what policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations are.

He says: “It has never actually been defined in law. No precedents have been built up, which has allowed actuaries to interpret it as they wish.”

The whole area is not so much a legal minefield as a vacuum. The FSA admits that the term policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations is not defined even though it appears in present legislation.

Axa media relations manager Phil Hickley says: “If you ask 10 different actuaries, you will get 10 different answers.”

The FSA says it is asking itself two questions: “First, to what extent has the fact we have not had a definition of policyholders&#39 reasonable expectations added to the problems with with-profits. Second, how could greater clarity be brought about and what factors should be taken into account?” The CA wants to see greater guidance from the FSA on these issues so consumers can make a more informed choice about where they are putting their money and what they can expect to receive in the future.

Review-weary IFAs are generally welcoming this element of the investigation as clarification of how products work will make their lives easier. The issue is still at consultation stage, with an open meeting at the FSA fixed for June 18 when industry and consumer representatives can offer their views.

The with-profits review also aims to deal with the issue of the supervision of financial strength following criticism of the FSA and the regulators that preceded it for their role in monitoring whether Equitable was financially strong enough to meet its liabilities.

Johnston Financial Services director Adrian Johnston says most IFAs do not have time to look at life company returns and make their own conclusions about financial strength. “With-profits is a murky business but, if the FSA can come up with a useful system for determining financial strength, I would be delighted,” he says.

Liver believes important lessons need to be learned and points out that the system in place for insurance companies is not as sophisticated as that for banks.

Whether the systems for supervising banks and life companies can ever be truly compared is debatable. The nature of their business and the level to which the consumer engages in the performance of the institutions is different. But Liver&#39s comments indicate the direction the FSA wants to regulation to move.

The CA is frustrated, however, that any reforms will be limited because the FSA is reluctant to hand over information it has gathered on regulated companies. McAteer says: “Regulators do not publish material that is commercially sensitive. Even when it is in the public interest, the law prevents them from doing so. We do not see any sign of change in that regard.”

Instituting a new regulatory system in the tangled world of with-profits is certainly a difficult task and a lengthy public debate seems inevitable. The FSA is predicting next spring as the earliest the industry will see substantial changes to the regulatory framework but it says it will require plainer language to be used in consumer documentation before then.

But the tone the FSA seems to be adopting points towards some place for with-profits in the future or at least some product using the same smoothing features.

Whatever changes are made, restoring consumer confidence in the product will require greater scrutiny and greater transparency.


MCCB says code breaches are down

The Mortgage Code Compliance Board says there was a reduction in the number of mortgage code breaches by intermediaries in the six months to January 2001. But the regulator is concerned that a quarter of firms visited by compliance officers failed to provide adequate explanations of the level of service they were providing and internal […]

ABN Amro gets its thinking cap on

ABN Amro Asset Management is getting into people&#39s heads with the introduction of the behavioural finance Japan fund.The fund is a Luxemburg-based Sicav managed from Hong Kong, that is aimed at experienced investors looking to move into Japanese funds.The behavioural finance Japan fund is denominated in Yen and will track the MSCI Japan index. It […]

Skipton launches mortgage discount scheme

Skipton is launching a mortgage discount scheme which reduces the interest rate of borrowers’ loans the longer they have been with the society. The scheme will automatically apply a 0.3 per cent discount off Skipton’s variable rate of 6.9 per cent after a mortgage has been held for two years and a 0.5 per cent […]

Schroders – North American Fund

Friday, 1 June 2001.Type: Unit trust.Aim: Growth by investing in North American companies.Minimum investment: Lump sum £1,000, monthly £25.Investment split: 100 per cent in North America.Isa link: Yes.Pep transfers: Yes.Charges: Initial 5.25 per cent, annual 1.5 per cent.Commission: Initial 3 per cent, renewal 1.5 per cent for Isa and Pep transfers only.Tel: 0800 718777. 

Cricket - thumbnail

England vs Australia: pensions

Well, the cricket season is here, and England and Australia are stepping up to the wicket. Although we compete with each other in the sporting world, when it comes to pensions, Australia’s pension programme is held up as a model for our auto-enrolment initiative. Auto-enrolment was introduced because people weren’t saving enough into their pensions, and it is still early days but signs are positive. However, in Australia, saving into a pension is compulsory, and in fact employers are the ones who have to pay in. Employees in Australia can make additional contributions into their pensions, but they don’t have to. Should the onus be on the employer or employee to save? Well in the UK we think it’s both, but to get ‘adequate’ savings for retirement it’s the employee who has to pay more in.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    Why register with Money Marketing ?

    Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

    News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
    Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

    Money Marketing Events
    Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

    Research and insight
    Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

    Have your say
    Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

    Register now

    Having problems?

    Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

    Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm