Tories wary of product regulation

Shadow financial secretary to the Treasury Mark Hoban has warned that a move towards product regulation could harm competition and innovation.

At the Tenet annual conference in London yesterday, a delegate asked Hoban if a move to product regulation was needed due to recent regulatory failures.

The delegate said: “We’ve tried advice regulation for three decades now, it hasn’t worked lets move on. What we really need is regulation where the product itself gets regulated and rubber stamped.”

But Hoban said: “If you have products kite-marked it gives consumers more confidence. But equally what we don’t want to see is the process for innovation and competition in the financial services market unnecessarily harmed by product regulation because it could act as a brake on innovation. We need to think quite carefully about how it would work.”

The delegate suggested that if providers wanted to work outside a product regulation regime caveat emptor should apply.

But Hoban said: “I don’t think there is an appetite more broadly to move back to caveat emptor for non-standard products. There is not much support for that amongst regulatory and policy makers.”

Hoban also reiterated Tory plans to continue the implementation of the RDR if it wins next year’s election. He said: “When we announced our plans to scrap the FSA there were some questions of will this effect the timetable of the implementation of RDR. I don’t believe these reforms to the regulatory structure need to impact the time table of the RDR. To allow that process to be disrupted will be detrimental to  the industry and consumers.”

Hoban also aired concerns over the recent failings in the structured product market. He said marketing material for the Lehman-backed products was “misleading” and failed to refer to the real risks involved for investors.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 42 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Dear Mr Hoban

    If there had been product regulation we wouldn’t be in this mess today and all those hours the regulator spends on mopping up would be reduced considerably, thereby saving UKPLC and the great unwashed a lot of money.

    I have always insisted that advice must be regulated, but it has to be balanced.

  2. I think you mean “brake on innovation” not “break on innovation!

  3. Isn’t it time that leading members of the future Tory Government stopped making unclear and misleading statements regarding RDR?

    I’m quite happy to speak my mind on this: taking on board the latest ‘twaddle’ by Mark Hoban at the Tenet conference, frankly I can see little or no future in my current role as an Independent Financial Adviser – no matter if Labour or Conservatives win the next Election.

    In my oppinion neither of them have a clue as to how to draft new Regulation to protect the Consumer and promote the long-term viability of Independent Advice and if this is the case, then I want nothing more to do with this industry.

    This Country has gone to the Dogs!

  4. Hogwash. Product regulation wouldn’t stifle competition or innovation ~ why should it?

    What it would do is place responsibility for the failure of a product approved by the regulator in the lap of the regulator and nobody else. Faced with that, Hector Sants or his successor would find it rather difficult to deflect the blame by talking about things like “collective responsibility”.

    Product regulation will never happen.

  5. Dear Mr Hoban

    Still siting on the fence I see with more contradictory comments:-

    What is a ‘standard product’ compared to a ‘non-standard product’ ??

    “not much support among regulatory and policy makers” – well of course there is no support – voting for Xmas & Turkeys come to mind – it would be like supporting your own redundacy because we wouldn’t need most of these leeches who are bleeding us dry !!

    So the Lehman products literature was “misleading” – and yet no criticism for the current government & regulatory system that allowed this to happen at every level !!

    Same old… same old … !!! – 12 years of NuLabour screwing up everything and the country is crying out for some leadership to sort the mess out and you sit there on the fence – no wonder we are all disillusioned !

    Come on Mr Hoban, get off the fence and come out with some ‘straight’ talking – oh I forgot you’re a politician !!!

  6. And that is exactly what the regulator does NOT want. Sants & Co would rather leave the way open to blame somebody else for their “collective intellectual failures” I believe is the soundbite . Sounds like this Hoban guy has been spending too much time talking to the holy grail at canary wharf. Everytime he speaks you could swear it sounds no different to the twaddle spewed forth from the regulator.Has he actually spoken with any IFAs to get their take on things? Probably not, he could not care less what they think. His thinking is probably that we are so fed up with labour we will automatically vote tory.
    Do not count on the tories to change anything which will improve our lot. Hoban has already said there will be no longstop for IFAs under a tory government. Our answer should be No Longstop No Vote. I agree with R Gronow it is time to get out.

  7. You say you are concerned to ensure that competition in the financial services market is unnecessarily harmed by product regulation.

    For a politision in waiting I do not understand your mindset! Mr Hoban your actions or lack of them mean you are increasingly seen as part of the IFA problem and not the solution! It seems to me Mr Hoban that consensus politics is alive and well and that you do not offer anything other that what we have under Labour.

    What party in waiting can afford to ignore middle england and the small IFA?By this I mean the votes of 10,000 IFAs’, 20,000 support staff and 2 millions IFA clients!

    If this is so then please have the courtesy to say so and allow us to cast our vote accordingly. .

  8. This guy will be detrimental to the IFA.

  9. Incompetent MPs Award Team 27th November 2009 at 3:49 pm

    We don’t need advice from people who know little or nothing. I know of 2 men who spoke directly to this man who is in cahoots with the FSA and his mates at PWC who also are in the with FSA. I’m afarid I don’t trust this man anymore than the current Labour riff-raff.

    I am also fed up being told by others with less knowledge and expereince how I should run my business. IFAs are the ones to learn from. Therefore Hoban gets my wooden spoon

  10. Some form of product regulation is essential.

    There is no hope while the FSA rule as they have no idea whatever how the simplest of products work. They just treat all consumers as congenital idiots and everyone they regulate as crooks, unless they can see a career path.

    I gave up trying to talk to them years ago “We don’t need the help of the trade Press to get our message across.”

    78.3% of IFAs we surveyed are scared to even make a suggestion to the FSA – their is NO real consultation, just the FSA forcing often daft ideas on a helpless industry.

    The great scandals of the last 20 years should ALL have been prevented by inteligent Regulation. After the event is no good.

    Right, they need Vogon translators before it is too late. (For non Hitch Hikers Guide fans, the Vogons came to destroy the earth and would not stop as a planning notice had been posted – in an alien language – on Alpha Centauri)

  11. Put very simply, New labour has never understood how to govern. They are full of targets but never do anything. The FSA is unaccountable, has not mastered their brief and every idea they have introduced leaves the industry in worst shape than when New Labour were elected. FSMA 2000 is an afront in law, does not work and must be repealed as must so many of their mistakes.

    RDR is detrimental to the consumer but enables the banks to be as unfair to the customer as their charging systems for o’drafts etc. We, the voter, want a return to the Rule of Law not the idiotic mess we have experienced from New Labour.

  12. Shadow financial secretary to the Treasury Mark Hoban has warned that a move towards product regulation could harm competition and innovation. What does he know about The Financial Services Industry? Why not get someone who is from the industry, you would have a better chance of sorting it out.

    You would not get an airline pilot to operate on you. And vice versa. No one is expert at everything.

    Jack Morris

  13. More of the same! It is a real David & Goliath
    struggle to get any justice & human rights.

  14. Hoban is uneducated in his portfolio, plus legally illiterate and unfortunately on the brink of power. A dangerour cocktail
    Oh dear.
    I was hoping the probable new Conservative Government would be on the side of the small businessman, freeing us from the shackles of overbearing regulation where only a very light touch is needed.

    Rather than being once again in the ‘sunny uplands’ it looks like we’re going to be dunked into the cess pit – again. The whole thing stinks.

    If Hoban is the new face of the Conservatives,
    ‘I’m out’

  15. I met with Mark Hoban recently with a view to obtaining an understanding of his views and the potential Conservative policy towards advisers.

    He gave the distinct impression that he felt advisers were no better than bancassurers and went so far as to state that his mother had received excellent advice from her bank for the previous ten years.

    These noises were not encouraging and my feeling is that he will not be any particular friend of the IFA sector. His PWC accountancy background, which aligns with many of the Canary Wharf denizens, suggests that his loyalties may lay elsewhere.

    I hope that I am wrong because the Conservatives will shortly be given a blank canvas on which to form the design of the next ten years of financial capability. The signs are not promising – so much can be achieved but so little thought appears to have been given.

  16. Other than here is one IFA who is prepared to tell the FSA they need to change, most of what I would have written has been said above!

    However MR HOBAN GO AND BORROW A BRAIN FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS A LITTLE ABOUT THIS SUBJECT. Perhaps borrow one from an IFA before they are destroyed by the so called regulator. Shame I cannot swear on here!

  17. Incompetent MPs Awards Team 27th November 2009 at 4:31 pm

    I’m with Chris Miller with this one. They know nothing and the CONservatives will not get my vote if they don’t listen.

    To your peril to the MPs who don’t listen to those who know.

  18. michael hollingdale 27th November 2009 at 4:37 pm

    I am afraid Mark that most of the comments are pretty damaging for yourself and the Tories –

    I have been a sole practitioner for over 35years and am quite likely to be put out of business as a result of RDR –

    I do appreciate that you are a busy man but if you really are interested in talking to a genuine IFA in person do please give me a call – I will meet with you anywhere but certainly your performance indicates that you have spent very little time speaking to the people that matter !!

    My name address and number is supplied so I do look forward to a response and hoefully a meeting –

    Kind regards,

    Mike Hollingdale

  19. How David Cameron came to give Mark Hoban a position in any future government will be at his peril, the guy just doesn’t listen and hasn’t a clue about the real world. Cameron ought to look at Potential Parliamentary Candidates and other MPs who do know what Financial Services is all about to have his job as this guy is letting power get the better of him. Several Tory MPS have spoken to him and he doesn’t even listen to them so wake up Cameron votes will slip away from you with this *****!

  20. you can tell from these various comments that this industry is in a mess, and IFA’s are sick to the back teeth of it.
    Many IFA’s will leave the industry and that cannot be a positive thing for the consumer.
    This needs intelligent politicians with the ability to listen to the oridinary people in order to sort this problem out. Mr Hoban is not demonstrating this and I hope David Cameron is taking notice and understands that WE DO NOT WANT A REPEAT OF THE POOR REGULATORY ATTITUDE WHICH IS ALREADY IN PLACE. not only do we want a change of government but we want a change in direction as well otherwise want is the point.

  21. There is no sense in my labouring the point (FOS Complaint data does that admirably) but it is clear that no significant consumer detriment has been proved by their use of the present IFA community. On the contrary, recent history since the early 1990’s would indicate that there has been a strong correlation between the strength of the IFA sector and the competitiveness of the mainstream, long term savings and pension providers. The most cursory research proves beyond reasonable doubt that those institutions which offer their products via IFAs have better performing, lower charged products than those which only distribute through their own distribution network. Why this is, is hard to prove but it seems reasonable to suppose that IFAs bring competitive pressure to bear on providers by virtue of their having a choice.

    The most optimistic assessments I have seen indicate that 30% of IFAs will leave the industry in 2012 as a result of the lack of grandfathering. The slack will not be taken up by the “qualified” IFAs – contrary to some opinions. The time required to do the job properly and meet regulatory requirements is now such that there just is not the time to deal with that level of increase in client numbers.
    The obvious result of this is that all IFA supporting product providers (including wraps) face a fall in business of 30%. Now it is clearly simplistic to simply assume that the blow will fall mathematically across the board, but however it falls, the fact is that for most IFA only providers this will render them unviable. Worse than that is the likelihood that some might be forced to close immediately with the usual associated problems for their customers. There will be more negative headlines and a further loss of confidence as these firms fold.

    A great number of smaller but decently run institutions will therefore be forced to merge or more likely and ultimately, seek takeovers from larger institutions. The institutions who will benefit most from this will be those with an unfair competitve advantage – the major banks – whose advantage is unfair because they have been bailed out by taxpayer’s money.

    In other words, many of the individual IFAs and many of the smaller providers who will be forced out of business in 2012 will find that a substantial part of the personal and corporate taxes they have been paying from 2007 until 2012 (which has been handed over to the major banks without their consent) will now be used to purchase their businesses at knock down prices for the express purpose of acquiring a bigger asset base and for the undisclosed purpose of eliminating competition.

    I do not expect the FSA nor the Treasury, nor even the Conservative Party to be particularly moved by the prospect of this injustice, however I do believe that it is the moral duty of the prospective government to consider the great consumer detriment which this state of affairs will bring about.

    I believe that it is highly likely that there will only be up to 10 retail financial conglomerates by 2020 as a result of this. My understanding is that one of the primary purposes of the FSA is to promote a healthy competitive market to which the entire population has access. Since my argument demonstrates that the number of institutions will decline sharply as a direct consequence of RDR this means that RDR will cause a massive reduction of choice of product in the UK (which used to lead the world in this). I would suggest that this unintended result cannot be in the public interest and wll result in a poorer nation because of an even larger savings and insurance gap. Such a massive loss of confidence in the savings industry can in crease dependence on the State – just as we move into the most grave fiscal deficit since 1945. I assume that this would be contrary to Conservative Party policy?

    Moreover, given the banks’ previous record of market abuse and the startling coincidence that their savings, life assurance and pension products seem to all bear similar levels of (much higher than average) charge, I would also suggest that the other unintended result will be a significant increase in costs for the average customer, with the strong likelihood that the poor and unsophisticated will bear the brunt of this, until they become embittered and cynical.
    In the circumstances I would suggest that, if the RDR is not to regarded as a catastrophic failure resulting in reduced choice, higher costs and the possible complete disengagement of, perhaps, the majority of responsible consumers from the field, further consideration needs to be given to the qualifications issue.

    You won’t need to regulate products at all Mr Hoban because the industry will be owned by the banks and it will cease to innovate and operate the same sort of cartel as the banks now do.

  22. After almost 13 years of Labour misrule and denial it was to be hoped that a new Tory regime would be able to see the light. Seemingly we will be disappointed and let down. Mr Hoban you really need to wake up to the underlying issues of the RDR and the fact that it has been devised by a discredited and unqualified quango which is the lap-dog of the banks. If you do not grasp the real issues thousands of IFAs will be forced out of the industry leaving millions of people disenfranchised from financial advice which in turn will leave them with inadequate and unstructured provision for the future. We will be back to the times when people will have to go to the government with caps in hand for financial support.

    The requirement for thousands of experienced and skilled IFAs to have to sit a new level of exams just to stay in business is unprecedented, unfair,outragious and deemed by many to be illegal. Wake up Mr Hoban and get into the real world, there are 30,000 votes going begging!

  23. Harm Innovation???

    Me thinks he has his priorities wrong lets sort out the mess first then worry about stifling innovation.

    I have argued for splitting retail products into authorised by…FSA or whom so ever for Joe public as it were Mr Hobans mother perhaps.
    And then have a caveat emptor regime for those that demand innovation and wider choice.

    There is no reason for a retail client to hold both types.

    This is so simple it will not happen as those that wish to build empires and spend mountains of other peoples cash will it seems always come to the top there is something very rotten about all these unelected pay off positions for the “boys” quangos.

  24. 30 years of regulation, 30 years of saving and pension slowly not being taken up by the consumer.

    Please stop trying to place this on the advisers. Before Governments started down this regulation road, the nation did save. The problem was the Government did not control it and this is the real issue.

    Fine, no problem, carry on as frankly you the Government will be picking up the bill, when no one buys your off the shelf, pensions, savings and investments.

    If you had to do what the RDR is asking of our industry by 2012, you would soon change your tune, never mind the costs that are involoved.

    As for the consumer, if they cannot afford to pay for the advice it is of little use.

  25. Personally I am fed up with the whole thing. I agree with what David Williams and Alan Taylor have just said.

  26. So Product Regulation may harm competition and innovation ? As a client with an aggressive attitude to risk am I able to buy a car without brakes and no lights ? No – I didn’t think so. Has Product Regulation harmed the auto industry ?

    20 plus years has been wasted regulating the advice process. Time to try PR ( can see now why as a Tory you are afraid of the idea) for the vast majority of sales that occur daily.

    By all means regulate the small market for complex advice but regulate the far larger Product Sales market and you will see a significant improvement in the sale of protection and savings products.

  27. Harm Innovation???

    Me thinks he has his priorities wrong lets sort out the mess first then worry about stifling innovation.

    I have argued for splitting retail products into authorised by…FSA or whom so ever for Joe public as it were Mr Hobans mother perhaps.
    And then have a caveat emptor regime for those that demand innovation and wider choice.

    There is no reason for a retail client to hold both types.

    This is so simple it will not happen as those that wish to build empires and spend mountains of other peoples cash will it seems always come to the top there is something very rotten about all these unelected pay off positions for the “boys” quangos.

  28. Mr Hoban, your Party Slogan is “Vote for Change” is it not? I think Simon Mansell hit the nail on the head, trusted IFAs are “centres of influence” in their communities and should not be underestimated. We need to be convinced that Conservative words will match Conservative deeds. Your party’s lead in the Polls has already been damaged by Mr Cameron’s cracked “cast iron guarantee”, which showed doubtful judgement.

    I should like to think that in order to “Change”, one needs to “Listen”. We are in a mess because the cant “We are a Listening Government”, “we are a Listening FSA” was just that, cant, can’t and won’t.

    You may agree that we are in an almighty mess because of an abject failure to listen. Given my perception of your modus operandi to date, Mr Hoban, I do not think that the Obama slogan borrowed by the Conservatives is anything other than the usual cant. You have a very short window to convince us otherwise Mr Hoban.

  29. Dear Mr Hoban

    You will have heard of “Mondeo Man” and “Worcester Woman” both political terms used by polling companies in the United Kingdom to profile or describes a type of white collar professional who worries about quality of life issues. It has been perceived to represent someone who would previously have voted Conservative but would likely be swung to vote for Labour Party.

    Well I’m from Worcester so allow me to introduce to you IFA Man!

    There are 20,000 of us up and down the UK, 10,000 of which you intend to cull by your blind acceptance of what has gone before. I employ two staff and as my practice is typical of the many small IFAsaffected by RDR. We are talking about the redundancies of 30,000 of us and our support staff. In turn it is estimated that this will orphan 2 million clients from their independent advisers.

    The Conservatives must not be allowed to act as the FSA ventriloquist dummy for RDR.

    MPs represent constituents not the banks and vested interests. MPs are increasingly being seen as duplicitous! When it comes to MPs’ own affairs we get a plethora of them telling us that legislation over expenses must not be applied retrospectively and that it is wrong to bar MP’s employing their own wives, especially when this is to be applied retrospectively to many who have worked for their partners over past years. So why its this any different for the IFA. The answer is because you think we are a sub class and because the FSA has robbed us of our basics rights so we are unable to defend ourselves in the courts – in short because you think you can walk all over us – that’s why!

    Then we have the nursing profession and the new degree standards. Is there to be a mass cull of existing nurses because they do not have the new examinations? I’m afraid to say Mark Hoban if seems to me that you are closer to Labour than you are to my view of what the Conservatives “should” stand for. If you and your party are to be deemed worthy of government and my vote and the vote of thousands of IFA’s then you need to understand that the IFA have the “same” rights as every other citizen in the UK. If you do not then you are nothing more than a bully asserting your playground power over those your consider weaker and unable to fight back.

    This is a moral issue as well as a legal right and you need to represent these rights otherwise you will turn what could have been a Conservative vote into a protest vote. Nothing is more important to me than my livelihood and unless you and your party guarantee this then you won’t have my vote.

    Tony Blair said: The Financial Services Authority that was established to provide clear guidelines and rules for the financial services sector and to protect the consumer against the fraudulent, is seen as hugely inhibiting of efficient business by perfectly respectable companies that have never defrauded anyone. Gordon Brown said: The FSA is a ‘world-class regulator’. At the moment Mark Hoban could just as easily be a member of the FSA or Labour!

  30. I am quite troubled by what i have read about this man. Do we really need another accountant in charge of an industry that needs a champion not some lap dog of the banks and IFA. Is he a civil servant or an elected person put in charge to keep a check on this increasingly bureaucratic and overblown government department who seem to spend most of their time justifying their existence. Do we in fact need any of them any more? With the general improvement in the skills and training of IFA’s and the apparant lack of any reall complaints from our side of the fence, perhaps it could be argued that their job is largely done. Perhaps they need to concentrate instead on the sector where most complaints come from, the banks and tied advise sectors.

  31. Forget the Tories, it is obvious they are no better than the current lot.

    Lets back our Friend in Hull for Financial Secretary – even if he is UKIP
    He will definitely speak up positively for us, as he has done so already

  32. I agree with R Gronow. I posted a comment last week on the back of FSA Director-Sheila Nicolls RDR report 18/11/09. I am very disillusioned about the Financial Services sector- thanks in the main to the FSA’s Nazi style dictatorship approach to ‘overseeing’ the sector (over regulation has made us all expensive compliance staff, who do a little advice for very little income??). As I stated in my last comment it would appear that the FSA’s focus is to the IFA sector and they are hellbent on making the life of the small IFA a misery, whilst ignoring the banking sector (who of course played no part in the ‘credit crunch’ and who’s advisers can boast a clean slate when complaints due to bad advice are concerned- I think not!). Between the banks, the FSA and the Politicians (I say politicians rather than Government because again I view them all equally as useless! and who can never make a decision in fear of upsetting the minority) I think Corporate UK is in a ‘sorry sorry’ state and unfortunately I dont have much faith or trust that it or the life of the small IFA is going to get better soon and I share R Gronow’s view to get out of the industry. I have agreed redundancy with my current firm. I have had an offer of employment from another practice and I am considering setting up on a self employed basis with another IFA but I am seriously thinking to turn my back on the industry throwing away 17 years experience, just to get out of this depressed sector! and try something I might actually enjoy!

  33. On Radio 1 (I do listen to it occasionally) on Saturday, they were talking about untrained hairdressers causing burns on people and now the government may ne looking to “regular” hairdressers… Mr Hoban,we need less but better and more proportionate regulation, not MORE.
    I for one want to have the choice to resort to law and NOT be forced to accept the decisions of a quango in the form of the FOS who I have little confidence in having seen their handling of one of my client’s complaints againts Barclays Stockbrokers.

  34. Simon Hoadley IFA 30th November 2009 at 11:25 am

    The FSA is not accountable, has not mastered their brief and every idea they have introduced leaves the industry in worst shape than when Labour were elected. FSMA 2000 is an afront in law, does not work and must be repealed.

    RDR is detrimental to the consumer,but enables the banks to be unfair to their customers We, the voter, want a return to the Rule of Law not the idiotic mess we have experienced from Labour.

    The IFA market has a tiny % of complaints, somehere I believe around 1%. Why do we have so much regulation when our record is the envy of every sector in the business world?

    I have been a financial adviser with an insurance comapny just advising on their products, a financial adviser in a bank just advising on their products and have been Independent for seven years.
    Being Independent, has by far been the best way to advise and give best service to the public.

  35. Hoban is just another ‘here today, gone tomorrow’ politician who has no proper grasp of our profession or our customers, so will do nothing, just keep the plates spinning in the air, crawl away from responsibility, leaving the portfolio in tatters as they usually do. Probably another Stephen Byers in the making.
    God help us all
    I’m making plans to leave. Roll on 31.12.2012

  36. I was hoping from better from the conservatives who are going to have sort out the problems they inherit. Unfortuneatly, they seem to think that radical change is not necessary. Hoban is obviously oblivious to his future task in getting people to invest in pensions and savings again as the RDR will reduce the frontline sales team he will have and make regular saving uneconomic to sell/advise upon. Jope public do not in the main buy they are sold to by experienced sales/advisers.

  37. Why not email Mr Hoban you comments direct or indeed Mr Cameron.

    He may or may not read them but at least you will have tried.

    His email from his website is:

  38. Whilst Produst Regulation would appear tyo be a reasonably sensible method of assessing whether a particular vehicle is toxic or not there is one very significant factor against it.

    Why would ANY Government or Regulator take this almost impossible job on board. Imagine the furore when a Kite-marked product crashes.

    Who could they blame?

    Take a retrospective look. Would Equitable Life Pension plans have been Kite-marked? Would Standard Life Mortgage Endowments have been Kite-marked? How about Split Cap investments or Precipice Bonds? Or even With Profit Bonds?

    And if they HAD been then who would be responsible for the compensation payments? Surely IFAs could not then be held responsible.

    Mr Hoban has no intention of creating a fair system. Retaining the IFA whipping boy is an eminently sensible proposition for any Government.

    Product Regulation by a central independent authority would clearly be a benefit to the Public and Advisers but a potential catastrophe for Government.

    It does not however need to be so — How about a risk- rated product table – with ratings being decided by a panel of ‘experts’ including bankers, IFAs, consumers and politicians.

    This MUST however be backed up by a Product Levy, and perversly the highest levy to be applied to the lowest risk ratings. In this way there is a form of payment for a ‘low-risk’ plan which reflects the probable cost of compensation when something goes wrong – as it inevitable would.

    Frankly I believe that a Product Levy system is a much more realistic proposal than product regulation. Both would be a close to a panacea.


  39. If we had proiduct regulation like they do in the States ( and that hasn’t stifled coimpetion) we would never have been accused of “commission bias being the root cause of Misselling FSA Consumer panel”

    The RDR would have never raised its’ head Millions of £’s would have been saved and this inept organistaion called the FSA could have spent time regulating the baks and saving the coutry Billions

  40. Andy Micklewright IFA 30th November 2009 at 5:40 pm

    If they havent worked it out, it the banks that have dropped us in the s##t, very abley assisted by the banks, its the banks that get the bigger percentage of the complaints to the ombudsman (FSA by another name) and its the banks that have the largest percentage of complaints upheld against them by the ombudsman (FSA) and of course because of theis the logical people to screw in the future is the IFA’s.

    As a result of the RDR, the IFA population will decline (see previous comments) and thus the place that everyone will be forced to go for products is guess where, yes the banks. Government will ove this considering how much the government has put into the banks mind.

    Can you just imagine 10-15 years time when the regulator (whatever they are called then but with the same staff) comes up with another set of rules that costs us millions to solve the problems of lack of competion in the market place as the banks are screwing the public again? Sound familiar?

    I too am looking to get out as we are being used a scapegoats for FSA, banks and government mistakes!

  41. Regulate the banks!
    Don’t be silly!

  42. CTCD0y bmguredfkwbc, [url=]djgvwjkbatfk[/url], [link=]zeqvwfotaaje[/link],

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