FSA censures UK banks over unclear information
The UK's airwaves and newspapers were full of articles about payment protection insurance (PPI) in October, after the Financial Services Authority scolded banks for failing to "treat customers fairly" when selling this product to them. According to the FSA, many firms are still not giving customers clear information during the sales conversation, it is not being made clear that PPI is optional, and customers are not getting full information about how much the insurance will cost. Customers are also still not being made fully aware that there may be parts of the policy under which they cannot claim, according to the regulator.
"The bottom line is that customers should come away from the sale having been given the best possible chance of understanding that PPI is optional, what the policy will and will not cover and how much it costs," says the FSA's managing director of retail markets Clive Briault. "On the strength of our findings, the industry has further to go to demonstrate that customers really are being treated fairly in this market."
The consumer banking industry has come in for sharp criticism from the UK government of late. Several months ago, credit card companies and banks were told to lower their fees for late payments. Fees for clearing bounced checks are also being examined.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous
SEC poised to approve expansion of CME-FICC cross-margining
Agency’s new division heads moving swiftly on applications related to US Treasury clearing
ECB bank supervisors want top-down stress test that bites
Proposal would simplify capital structure with something similar to US stress capital buffer
Clearing houses warn Esma margin rules will stifle innovation
Changes in model confidence levels could still trip supervisory threshold even after relaxation in final RTS
BlackRock, Citadel Securities, Nasdaq mull tokenised equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel recently debated the ramifications of a future with tokenised equities