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
Foreign banks can swerve US Basel op risk capital charges
New proposal offers category III and IV banks op-out from regime, but intragroup trades penalised
BoE’s Bailey expects global consensus on FRTB internal models
Isda AGM: UK is reviewing proposals from US and EU regulators before finalising its IMA rules
DRW chief slams ‘ridiculous’ OCC stablecoin rule
Isda AGM: Wilson warns week-long redemption freeze would deter use of Genius Act coins as cash leg of tokenised repo
Dealers push for more revisions to Basel III endgame
Isda AGM: Goldman, JP Morgan bankers want changes on cross-product netting, CVA and default risk charges
StanChart: UK, EU should copy US ‘commercial’ Basel III
Isda AGM: Exec warns divergent Basel III rules will push trading into less-regulated entities
NBFI oversight ‘no longer adequate’, say BdF economists
Researchers call for stronger supervision of non-bank sector ‘before risks actually materialise’
Why Brexit still stirs up trouble for cross-border business
As EU erects another obstacle, banks consider ways around it – or exit strategies
Can US regulators keep Collins happy with one capital stack?
Legal experts say Basel III endgame redraft retains spirit if not letter of the floor