Alliance & Leicester fined £7m over serious PPI failings
LONDON - UK regulator the Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined Alliance & Leicester a record £7 million ($12.2 million) for the worst case yet of mis-selling payment protection insurance (PPI). The regulator said the UK bank had sold approximately 210,000 PPI policies over three years at an average price of £1,265.
According to the regulator, the bank had failed to give enough information about the PPI or to make it sufficiently clear whether the insurance costs were optional. It instead sought reasons to sell the insurance without considering the consumer's needs, and trained staff to put pressure on customers who queried the inclusion of a PPI package with their loan repayment.
Margaret Cole, FSA director of enforcement, says: "The failings are the most serious we have found. This is reflected in the record PPI fine. It is very disappointing that after three years of regulation we are still finding serious problems in PPI sales."
Alliance & Leicester's fine marks a major enforcement of the FSA's Treating Customers Fairly (TCF) initiative. The regulator has said 2008 is the year of reckoning for TCF. The bank has agreed to write to every customer who took out an unsecured loan between January 14, 2005 and December 31, 2007, prompting them to review their policy against product information sent to them.
The bank will also review relevant rejected complaints and claims and pay compensation to those affected. By co-operating and carrying out these measures, the bank gained a 30% reduction on the full £10 million penalty.
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
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos