View more on these topics

Regulatory costs force Norfolk advice firm to close

Regulatory costs have been blamed for the closure of a Norfolk IFA just days after advisers saw their FSCS levies almost double to £100m.

In a statement on its website, Norwich-based advice firm Taylor & Taylor says regulatory changes have made continuing as a business unviable.

It says: “We very much appreciate the support provided by our clients over the years and, while we will immediately cease providing financial advice services, our administration staff will be on hand until 29 May to help clients transition and help keep inconvenience caused by our decision to a minimum.

“We would like to take this opp­ortunity to thank you for your business. This has been a difficult decision for the directors and not one that has been taken lightly.”

The firm has been headed by Russell and Alan Taylor since its creation in 2003 and was approved by the FCA for pensions, mortgages and investments.

Taylor & Taylor’s client book has not been passed to another advisory business and instead product providers have been instructed to correspond directly with clients.

The firm has pledged that all client files will be scanned securely for any future regulatory purposes, with a professional firm brought in to subsequently shred files. It has not been put into default by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

Taylor & Taylor could not be reached for comment.

Kingsfleet Wealth managing direc­tor Colin Low says: “Increases to regulatory costs should be capped so that they can’t increase so rapidly.”

Basi and Basi Financial Planning managing director Michael Basi adds that regulatory costs can be most burdensome where firms focus on low-value work.

He says: “If you have a niche and you focus on it, the costs are entirely manageable. But practices dealing with a high number of transactions and low-wealth clients may become  unsustainable.”


Ambitious landlords fuelling rise in remortgage business

Competitive rates and ambitious landlords are driving a growing focus on remortgaging among buy-to-let lenders, according to experts. Figures issued by broker Mortgages for Business show that 66 per cent of buy-to-let loans were for remortgages in the first quarter of 2015, up from 62 per cent at the end of 2014. Remortgages have now […]

Tom Kean: Confused regulation is holding back advisers

I like to think one of the skills that makes me a decent adviser is the ability to convert complex, illogical and sometimes-opaque notions into bite-sized snippets of information clients might understand. Thirty years in the job has led me to accept, although we live and breathe our subject, that is simply not the case […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Julian Stevens 7th May 2015 at 9:24 am

    I imagine the latest round of additional FSCS levies, on top of all the others, not to mention endlessly escalating premiums for ever more restrictive PII cover will have been the final nail in the coffin. And, at the other end of the spectrum and for very similar reasons, HSBC is considering relocating its HO outside of the UK. Regulation and its costs are strangling the life out of the FS industry.

  2. This is a headline which will be used by those who have an agenda against the FCA regarding costs and fees. Yet again we do not know why this firm stopped advising and I would warrant that if you went through the accounts you would find that the fees and levies were not the reason for failure. They are used as an excuse for failure.
    If they said that the costs of giving advice in the current regulatory and litigious society, the costs of compliance, IT, employment, regulatory reporting then I would believe it. The rise in fees and levies is reprehensible, immoral and frankly bullying but not the prime reason why a business fails.

  3. The straw that broke the camels back !

  4. peter mulholland 9th May 2015 at 2:32 am

    Many business’ fail in all sectors for many reasons it’s capitalism and works the best

  5. Unlikely to be the full story…. there are usually other options such as mergers etc. This looks more like a tantrum than it does a sensible business decision…surely, if the client bank had any value they would have looked to realise the value in some way… and why abandon the clients like this? There must be more to this..

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