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
One thing missing from US Basel III proposal: a deadline
Without a deadline, risk teams will struggle to secure resources to begin implementation projects
In simplifying credit risk models, EBA could compound capital costs
Skipping hard yards of internal ratings-based approach might trip higher capital charges and implementation costs
Change fatigue could dim EBA’s credit risk simplicity drive
Revisions may be kept to a minimum as short-term implementation burden weighs on banks
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