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
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
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion
Iosco chief sees no need for CCPs to hold more capital
CCPs have shown resilience in volatile times without extra skin-in-the-game, says Buenaventura