Blog

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

Bob Hunt

Bob Hunt

18 May 2021
It could have been worse.
 
Reading the news that the Financial Compensation Scheme's (FSCS) levy has been revised down to 'just' £833m, and mortgage intermediaries will now have to contribute 'just' £12m, you can't help wondering if this was the plan all along.
 
Announce a budget that beggars belief - over £1bn - which would be a 48 per cent increase. Suggest mortgage intermediaries will pay £22.9 million, up from the £3m they paid last year, which just so happens to be a 663 per cent increase on the previous year.
 
Then revise down that budget, take £10.9m off the mortgage intermediary contribution (now it's just the 400 per cent increase) and hope the industry breathes a sigh of relief, thinks 'it could have been worse' and blithely accepts it.
 
Perhaps I'm being overly cynical here but the facts of the matter remain - the intermediary contribution will rise £9m to £12m. And consider this, would our sector have felt similarly about such an increase if this had been the original announcement?
 
You're damn right it would have, because regardless of whether it's a 663 per cent increase or a 400 per cent increase, the underlying unfairness of a system which asks good firms to pay for bad, and at the same time asks good firms in an entirely different sector to pay for bad firms active in other sectors, still remains. A point now openly recognised by the regulator itself.
 
Penalties where liable
 
Recently the Financial Conduct Authority itself said this in a statement: “We also want to work towards a system where firms which cause redress liabilities end up paying more of the bill before recourse is needed to the FSCS.“
 
In other words, we want to get to a better structure where those who are responsible for the issues, problems and costs of compensation, actually have to pay for them.
 
Perhaps there might also be room in this reimagining of the current structure for the regulator itself to ensure less firms are responsible for these huge compensation claims. Perhaps a more robust system of authorisation, ongoing reviews and risk assessment which ensures we don't actually get to these appalling outcomes in the first place?
 
Add in a focus where firms are not punished by having to compensate customers in sectors where they don't even advise, and we might begin to have a system which is much fairer for all.
 
 In the meantime, let's not consider any 'reduction' in these fees as some sort of victory. It's not something to be grateful for, it's just marginally better than the worst-case scenario we were offered a few months back.
 
A scenario which you might wish to assume was never likely to play out in the first place.

Reading this blog counts towards your CPD!

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


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


29 January 2021

Long-term imposter product may finally become relevant as a high LTV option


27 January 2021

How to deal with a subject access request


12 January 2021

What we've learned from the FCA's advice reviews


7 January 2021

Uncertainty continues into 2021


Paradigm

THIS SITE IS FOR PROFESSIONAL INTERMEDIARY USE ONLY AND NOT FOR USE BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

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.