View more on these topics

Treasury mandarins admit claims management clampdown regrets


Two of the Treasury’s most senior civil servants have admitted the Government should have moved faster to clamp down on claims management companies.

The National Audit Office reported last week that CMCs had gained up to £5bn from claims handled by the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Regulation of CMCs is currently handled by the Claims Management Regulator which operates under the Ministry of Justice, although a review is in process to examine the future of regulation of the sector, including whether charges should be capped.

And at a hearing of the Public Accounts Committee yesterday, MPs questioned whether the Government could have moved earlier to prevent money being siphoned off by CMCs.

HM Treasury director general Charles Roxburgh, described the comments from MPs as “a good challenge”, while second permanent secretary John Kingman admitted: “With the benefit of hindsight it is clearly the case that the work we are doing now, no doubt it would have been better if we had acted sooner.”

Labour MP and committee member Chris Evans accused the Government and the FCA of “fiddling while Rome burns”, in particular relation to misselling in the aftermath of the pension freedoms.

However, acting FCA chief executive Tracey McDermott said the regulator had carried out a significant amount of work to prevent pension savers being ripped off.

She said: “The most immediate things that we have done were in the short term. When the freedoms came in we introduced new rules requiring firms to give what we call retirement risk warnings, which cover things like issues around health, around scams, around dependents, around tax and so on.

“We have been very focused, and indeed the industry is very focused on the fact that this cannot become another misselling scandal.”

However, McDermott warned shifting regulatory focus to products, rather than individuals, risks stifling the market.

She said: “That would be a massive shift of emphasis for the organisation and it would be something that parliamentarians would want to debate. There is a real downside risk of pre-approving, in that you actually quell innovation.”



PPI: Huge gulf in pension savings remains despite reforms

Despite automatic enrolment and changes to the state pension, women have just half the pension savings of men, according to the Pensions Policy Institute. In the third of the think-tank’s studies of under-pensioned workers, it says the new state pension and introduction of the national living wage will reduce the savings gap. However, the study […]

Clock money 620 x 430

Banks to foot bill for £42m PPI awareness campaign

A campaign to raise awareness of a new deadline on complaints for missold payment protection insurance could be funded by lenders, according to a consultation paper from the FCA. In documents published today, the FCA proposes a two-year campaign to forewarn consumers of a 2018 halt on complaints, which it estimates would cost £42.2m. The […]


Govt steps up enforcement actions against CMCs

The Ministry of Justice has reported a sharp increase in the number of enforcement actions it has taken in the second quarter of the year, as it seeks to clamp down on claims management companies. A total of 25 investigations were started between April and June, compared with 35 in the entire year to March […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. If one was cynical, one might interpret Tracey McDermott’s comments as an admission that the FCA has not the faintest clue how to spot what might constitute good or poor product features and benefits until bucketloads have been sold and it can be slapped round the face with any obvious consumer detriment.
    But as I say…only if one is cynical!

  2. Good to see Tracey is still trotting out the Canary Wharf responsibility avoidance scheme.

    Surely she means that if the FCA managed products they would become responsible rather than be able to retrospectively blame advisors if something goes wrong?

    If stifling innovation leads to better customer outcomes then how can this be a bad thing?

  3. ….’However, McDermott warned shifting regulatory focus to products, rather than individuals, risks stifling the market.’

    Really???! Well why not try it and see!

  4. Kingman: “with the benefit of hindsight”

    No, my friend, it wasn’t anything as mystical as hindsight that you needed. It was just a set of ears and the willingness to use them to listen to anyone in the financial services business who would have told you, from the outset, how these people were operating.

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