Industry wide levy is a head scratcher

Bob Hunt

Bob Hunt

2 February 2021

There are few things that surprise me in financial services, but the recent news from the FSCS that it is likely to issue an industry wide levy of over £1bn for the 2021/22 year was undoubtedly a head scratcher moment.

The reason for the 48% increase is down to its forecast that many more firms will fail during the year, consumer claims will increase, these are likely to be more complex and therefore the FSCS needs the money to ensure ongoing confidence in the financial services sector.

Read that sentence back and then wonder how on earth we might have got to this point, in what is supposed to be one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the entire world, let alone in the UK or Europe.

There are so many anomalies in this that it's hard to know where to begin.

For a start, if the regulator and its compensation scheme are confident firms are going to fail in such large numbers, why aren't they doing all they can now to mitigate against that risk and to stop activity which could cause consumer harm. Prevent that happening now rather than watching it happen later.

Isn't this what a regulator is supposed to do? Part of its role is to consider the financial robustness of the firms it regulates - it if has major concerns about that robustness, act now instead of acquiescing to those firms failing and then having to issue compensation when the claims come in.

The other point to be made goes straight to the heart of the way the FSCS is funded and its inherent unfairness.

Take mortgage advisory firms, as the prime example. Those advisers within the FCSC's 'Home Finance Intermediation' category will be asked to pay £22.9m towards the levy this year, that is a 600% plus increase on the £3m that was paid last year.

This, at a time when (as mentioned) the overall budget is going up by 48%.

If the increase for mortgage advisers was the same, it would mean an extra £1.44m, not £18.9m extra.

This, at a time, when it is not mortgage sector participants who are likely to be failing in greater numbers, or responsible for poor advice, but when the vast majority of problems are being seen in the investment and pensions space.

So, not only are mortgage advisers being asked to pay for more than their own share, but they are also being asked to fund the compensation of consumers who have been failed in sectors in which they have no interest whatsoever.

This is an absolute disgrace. Would this be acceptable in other walks of life? Would all drivers, for example, who observe the speed limit be asked to pay the fines of all those that don't, or share the points that they receive for breaking the law? Of course not.

This appears to be the only sector in the known universe where good practice and good behaviour is penalised.

The FCA and FSCS is, in effect, making decent, hardworking, compliant firms pay for its own failures and for poor regulatory scrutiny.

It is effectively saying that it has mis-managed the entire financial services sector - notably in non-mortgage areas - by half and the outcome of that mismanagement is those who are compliant must stump up for those who aren't.

To say this system is fundamentally flawed would be a gross understatement.

It is a sad indictment on all those regulatory parties and beyond belief that mortgage advisory firms are going to have to fund the sins not of their fathers, but of their second cousins twice removed.

To coin a phrase, this cannot be normal and we should not accept that it's the shape of things to come.

If there was ever a time for our trade bodies and professional bodies to stand up and make the case against such an increase, it is now.

Otherwise this could be the future every single year.

Reading this blog counts towards your CPD!

Click here to add this session to your Paradigm CPD log.

20 December 2021

The public gets what the Public wants’ - or do they?

10 December 2021

Consultation Paper CP 21/36 “A new Consumer Duty”

7 December 2021

FCA’s Consumer Duty seems like a costly exercise for advisers

2 December 2021

Cyber crime update and reporting requirements

9 November 2021

Who will buy...?

1 November 2021

FCA: Remote working expectations for firms

18 October 2021

Remortgaging: Timing may not even matter this time

8 October 2021

Make stamp duty work for everyone

4 October 2021

Time to talk

1 October 2021

The FCA’s plans to tackle investment harm

27 September 2021

Lack of housing stock means brokers need to work client banks harder

3 September 2021

Let technology do the work in the fast-paced mortgage environment

2 September 2021

Time of new beginnings

18 August 2021

The proof of the pudding

12 August 2021

FCA pension transfer advice: don’t be confused by the label

12 August 2021

Time for a change?

26 July 2021

The engagement conundrum

26 July 2021

"I can’t do it all"

7 July 2021

Paused for breath

6 July 2021

SMCR part two - conduct questions

28 June 2021

Introducing a new us!

17 June 2021

Patches - what are they and why are they so important

17 June 2021

Multi-factor authentication - the simple solution

8 June 2021

SMCR part one - time to take stock

27 May 2021

A reminder of the 'good old bad old' days of protection tech

18 May 2021

Let's not consider any 'reduction' in these as some sort of victory

5 May 2021

Simple methods-calculating client profitability

30 April 2021

If the pandemic has been the mother of invention, it's time to carry on

22 April 2021

Opportunities abound in the market

19 April 2021

Early Movers are Shaping the 95% LTV Market

13 April 2021

Here's a conundrum

8 April 2021

Advice processes for vulnerable clients

29 March 2021

Vulnerable signs for advice firms to watch out for

5 March 2021

Lenders have not got to grips with how the pandemic impacted borrowers

2 March 2021

How Covid has changed our financial lives

2 March 2021

Supply needs to match demand

19 February 2021

Don't overlook product transfers

16 February 2021

Creating a plan for good CPD

5 February 2021

Stamp duty debate a black hole

2 February 2021

Industry wide levy is a head scratcher



APCC Member
Paradigm Consulting is a Member of the Association of Professional Compliance Consultants

Paradigm Consulting is a trading name of Paradigm Partners Ltd
Office address: Paradigm Partners Ltd, Paradigm House, Brooke Court, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 3ND
Paradigm Partners Ltd is registered in England and Wales. No.09902499. Registered Office: As above

Paradigm Mortgage Services LLP
Office address: Wellington House, Starley Way, Birmingham International Park, Solihull, B37 7HB
Registered in England and Wales. Company No: OC323403. Registered Office: Paradigm House, Brooke Court, Lower Meadow Road, Wilmslow, SK9 3ND
Paradigm Mortgage Services LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership.

Paradigm Protect is a trading name of Paradigm Mortgage Services LLP
Office address: Wellington House, Starley Way, Birmingham International Park, Solihull, B37 7HB
Paradigm Mortgage Services LLP is registered in England and Wales. Company No: OC323403. Registered Office: Paradigm House, Brooke Court, Lower Meadow Road, Wilmslow, SK9 3ND
Paradigm Mortgage Services LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership.