Barclays/Woolwich named and shamed by UK financial services authority
LONDON - The UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) has reported Barclays Bank, trading under the name of UK mortgage provider The Woolwich, to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) for undertaking not to use The Woolwich's terms, which the FSA deemed to be unfair practice.
Under the terms of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations, the FSA can challenge firms - referred to it by consumers, enforcement bodies and consumer organisations - that are using terms it deems to be unfair to consumers. Following the FSA's recommendations, the OFT will publish the FSA's results, including the name of the firm, on its consumer regulation website.
The FSA release warns that publishing information about such undertakings will likely attract more consumer complaints both to the FSA and direct to firms "which will need to be addressed", it says. The FSA also recommends that other financial services firms that have not given an undertaking or been subject to a court decision, as part of their risk management process, should remain alert to undertakings or court decisions concerning other firms. "These will be of potential value in showing the likely attitude of the courts, the FSA, the OFT or other qualifying bodies to similar terms or terms with similar effects," it says.
This undertaking follows a series of other enforcement actions launched by the FSA against UK mortgage firms deemed to be acting irresponsibly or unfairly, and takes place in a atmosphere of heightened awareness of the unfairness of bank charges - the OFT launched its test case against unfair bank charges in July.
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
FRTB revamp won’t restore models to past glory, risk managers say
US-inspired reform only expected to lead to small boost in adoption, with limited desks on IMA
Regulators must think bigger to tackle tech risks, says Hong Kong SFC
Leung warns AI adoption and recent cyber scares show new threats require global co-operation
Time to let some air out of the banking system?
Watchdogs worry about lowering standards, but policy-makers eye growth – they face a difficult dilemma
Competitiveness mandate for Esma faces uphill battle
European Parliament offers last chance to force Esma to take more nuanced approach
Europe expects FRTB to bite on XVA hedges
Risk Benchmarking: One-third of European dealers fear new market risk rules will have major effect on hedges
Burning ambition: will Europe join the US in setting fire to the rules?
As the US dismantles post-crisis regulations, some think Europe will follow in a bid to boost economic growth
Can US perpetual futures solve their identity crisis?
Market could fall under four different regulatory categories, with sharply diverging outcomes
Banks want AML data upgrade to complement US regulatory reform
FinCEN’s proposed overhaul sparks debate on whether it will lead to smarter or weaker supervision