View more on these topics

Revealed: How much are FCA directors claiming in expenses?

FCA chairman John Griffith-Jones racked up £27,000 worth of expenses in the year to March 2014, new figures published by the regulator reveal.

Statistics published yesterday show the regulatory boss claimed £15,000 for foreign travel between October and December 2013. He also expensed £300 worth of lunches and entertainment.

Between January and March 2014, Griffith-Jones claimed almost £6,000 for foreign travel and £900 for foreign accommodation and subsistence. This covered two trips to Frankfurt, each for one night, and a two-night stay in New York. 

Meanwhile, FCA chief executive Martin Wheatley billed for £22,000 of expenses during the period, the majority of which was made up of foreign travel and accommodation expenses.

Wheatley claimed £9,600 for foreign travel between January and March 2014, and £1,500 in foreign accommodation and subsistence. This covered a two-night stay in New York, a one-night stay in Paris via the Eurostar and a round trip to Hong Kong and Sydney, staying two nights in Hong Kong and one night in Sydney. 

Director of supervision Clive Adamson spent £11,000, including more than £1,000 in receipts for lunches and hospitality, while chief operating officer Lesley Titcomb spent a total of £1,600, all of which went on domestic trips.

Enforcement director Tracy McDermott posted just £200 for domestic travel. 

FCA expenses Griffith-Jones

John Griffith-Jones  April-June 2013 July-September 2013 October-December 2013 January-March 2014
Foreign travel £453.55 £0.00 £15,151.34 £5,931.79
Foreign accommodation and subsistence £347.37 £0.00 £1,464.89 £929.30
Domestic travel £498.32 £308.03 £922.50 £314.17
Domestic accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £339.00 £0.00 £120.00
Entertaining, working lunches & hospitality £296.03 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Total £1,595.27 £647.03 £17,538.73 £7,295.26

FCA expenses Martin Wheatley
 Martin Wheatley April-June 2013 July-September 2013 October-December 2013 January-March 2014
Foreign travel £3,087.22 £4,439.93 £441.00 £9,684.07
Foreign accommodation and subsistence £1,106.63 £1,273.17 £0.00 £1,534.08
Domestic travel £0.00 £428.47 £221.48 £0.00
Domestic accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £0.00 £165.00 £0.00
Entertaining, working lunches & hospitality £0.00 £97.86 £0.00 £0.00
Total £4,193.85 £6,239.43 £827.48 £11,218.15

FCA expenses Clive Adamson

 Clive Adamson April-June 2013 July-September 2013 October-December 2013 January-March 2014
Foreign travel £0.00 £4,300.27 £3,902.74 £0.00
Foreign accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £707.93 £282.31 £0.00
Domestic travel £203.45 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Domestic accommodation and subsistence £16.91 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Entertaining, working lunches & hospitality £0.00 £150.30 £980.00 £0.00
Total £220.36 £5,158.50 £5,165.05 £0.00

FCA expenses Tracy McDermott

Tracey McDermott   April-June 2013 July-September 2013 October-December 2013 January14-March14
Foreign travel £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Foreign accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Domestic travel £75.90 £0.00 £25.00 £21.00
Domestic accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Entertaining, working lunches & hospitality £0.00 £92.70 £0.00 £0.00
Total £75.90 £92.70 £25.00 £21.00

FCA expenses Lesley Titcomb
 Lesley Titcomb April-June 2013 July-September 2013 October-December 2013 January-March 2014
Foreign travel £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Foreign accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Domestic travel £0.00 £384.78 £640.77 £382.00
Domestic accommodation and subsistence £0.00 £124.45 £42.20 £0.00
Entertaining, working lunches & hospitality £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00
Total £0.00 £509.23 £682.97 £382.00

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 20 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I would imagine most executive boards spend 10 times this amount.

  2. It used to be called the “stench of corruption”.

  3. It would be nice to have unlimited expenses paid by someone without having to refer back to any one to justify them

  4. Is that all? £300.00 on lunches and entertainment? Looking at this article I have to say I am quite impressed. Dont know what I expected, a scandal I suppose, but I guess the new FCA are whiter than white afterall !

  5. All looks pretty reasonable to me (for what that’s worth)!

  6. “This covered a two-night stay in New York, a one-night stay in Paris via the Eurostar and a round trip to Hong Kong and Sydney, staying two nights in Hong Kong and one night in Sydney”.

    Private companies now tend to use conference calls/video conferencing to save on expensive travel costs (certainly the ones I have worked for in the last few years). However, these people don`t need to worry about that as someone else is picking up the tab, so let`s have a good old jolly up on a round the world trip.

    Words fail me.

  7. I echo much of the above sentiments. I think the expenses are modest and I think Messrs Titcombe and McDermott deserve special praise.

    Travel and accommodation are no doubt part of the job, but one might ask “Is your journey really necessary?” I can understand trips to Europe, but what relevance does Hong Kong or Australia have to UK and EU regulation? (Hong Kong may just have been a stopover). Not a lot I would have thought. If you want to have an indication of their process a teleconference or plain reading might suffice. This sort of travel looks suspiciously like a ‘jolly’ to me.

    However where the praise begins to falter is when one sees Mr Adamson’s bill for hospitality and entertaining – over £1,000.

    I would have thought that not only at the FSA but generally this sort of expense should fall on a P11D. It isn’t tax deductible on the company, but it is surely a benefit. Those who claim save on groceries.

  8. There may be some of the events these peeps go to that requires an actual presence there however video conferencing, Skype, Face time etc etc. I am sure there could be a huge reduction in expenses using these options. At the end of the day they don’t NEED to be in these places. However they all sound very attractive and exotic so maybe that explains the smile on his face.

  9. The boss of our local East Anglian Ambulance Trust managed to rack up £30,000 in expenses last year, and that’s without leaving the country. For once I don’t think this spending by the FCA is excessive.

  10. Aurangzeb Paracha 3rd September 2014 at 1:59 pm

    the figures are surprisingly justifyable

  11. How the hell people can justify this kind of expenditure from what is (near as damn it) a public service quango is beyond me

    These parasites are funded by my and your clients money ! its about time they learned the value of such !!

  12. why do they need to go abroad??

  13. These expenses aren’t beyond the realms of reality for the positions held and in the grand scheme of things pale into insignificance against the overall costs of the FCA.

    Lets face it, there’s far more money wasted in other areas by the regulators than these paltry amounts, I recall the cost of fresh flowers in the regulators offices were £200,000 between 2009 and 2013… now that’s scandalous.

  14. The saddest thing for me, is the people on here who think that these figures are reasonable. Fifteen THOUSAND pounds. I have not spent that much on holidays in the last ten years, and he manages it in a month. Actually quite angry at the people who think it is reasonable simply because they have seen worse in the past. Similarly, those who compare it to CEO’s of big companies : a CEO has to make a profit, and justify to shareholders. These people simply reach into a trough and help themselves. The woman who headed up the passport fiasco got a twenty thousand pound bonus in her current position. What do you have to do to earn twenty thousand pounds ?

  15. For £6000 to cover two trips to Germany and one to New York presumably business class was the order of the day which is great when spending your own money but not other peoples.
    To suggest the expenses are modest ignores the fact FCA is not a business and doubtless not generating a profit for its subscribers unlike a business may do for its shareholders.

  16. I tend to agree with Harry K on this. The more appropriate comparison would be whether these are reasonabe compared to a civil service expenses level as ultimately that is what regulatiors do, just it is us and not general taxation which pays.

  17. Let’s not forget this is supposed to be the financial services regulator not a typical fat cat city firm. The expenses are by no means modest and, along with the level of executive pay, demonstrate how this private organisation has no regard for the public it exists to serve.

    Having also received their (declared) gifts and hospitality records under the FOI Act, I can confirm they operate very far from what most businesses would regard as acceptable ‘arms length’ practice. Examples include gifts silver cuff links, cases of wine, countless lunches and drinks (even a beer festival) and of course the ubiquitous cuddly toy – several in fact! One can only wonder what was given in return for the numerous gifts and hospitality showered upon the staff and executives at the FCA. At the very least they gave their time, time paid for by all of us.

    Anyone can access this information, including the names of the organisations ‘sponsoring’, under the Freedom of Information Act. It makes interesting reading.

  18. The answer to the question of the title is simple: Whatever they want.

  19. The amount paid should be tested against and was there a more method of i.e. was value added to the organisation or simply a jolly to get out of the office.

    Equally was there any tax deducts for Benefit in ‘Kind’. < funded by other means>.

    While exchanging professional hotel cooking for home cooking.

  20. I wonder if Griffiths-Jones claims expenses for the time he spends bullshitting the TSC.

Leave a comment