Friday Friday, November 27, 2015 | RSS Feed

Tenet calls for FSA cost review

Tenet has called for a full cost/benefit review of what it has described as “uncontrollable regulatory costs”.

Nia Williams, 13 April, 2012

Tenet asked why, at a time when the government is preaching austerity and implementing major spending cuts, the FSA seems entirely exempt.

"The recent statement from the FSA that its costs will rise from £500.5m in 2011/12 to £578.4m for 2012/13 has caused some consternation within an industry already stretched by the financial impact of regulatory change," said Tenet's distribution & development director, Keith Richards.

He claimed that while the industry has to foot the bill, it is the consumer who will ultimately have to pay as the increasing costs will be passed on and possibly impact accessibility to advice for some.

Tenet is stepping-up its campaign to challenge both regulatory and FOS costs and has called for a fundamental reappraisal of the regulatory and claims culture system.

"Although the proposed regulatory increase has greater impact on banks and insurance companies, we are all affected and should be unified in seeking government intervention," proposed Richards.

"Hector Sants recently stated that much of the cost increase is due to regulatory change but wasn't it the regulator who instigated much of this change and therefore could have avoided such an unacceptable price hike?

"And let's not forget that, in a contracting industry, this increased cost burden becomes proportionately greater for those who remain.

"How can the regulator work in such isolation and be so out of touch with reality or the consequences of its actions."

Your Comments
1 Comment(s)

James wrote:

It is a bit rich (no pun intended) that Sheila Nichols of the FSA accuses IFAs of "commission gluttony" (quoted in Citywire, Oct 2010), a highly offensive and largely inaccurate statement, while all the while working for a regulator who just don't seem to be able to refrain from helping themselves to another few million every year. To achieve what exactly? By my reckoning, they have decisively failed on ALL of their statutory objectives. It's as though they think "give us more money, we'll get it right next time". Well apparently they're accountable to the Treasury, so surely they can rein the FSA in on these spiralling costs? Good luck there.

Friday, April 13, 2012 8:30:41 AM GMT

Recommend? (0)

Have Your Say