http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/requirement-notices/ahl-vreq.pdf Looks like the FCA are beginning to show their teeth. 3 issues noted with AHL/Cash Genie. (a) a systems weakness and other matters that may have allowed unauthorised charges to be applied to AHL customers' accounts; (b) potential misuse of banking information provided to affiliated websites to repay outstanding debts of existing AHL customers who are in arrears; and © a number of issues in relation to the refinancing (I.e. rolling over) of customers' loans. The regulator has instructed CG to carry out a S166, where they have toa ppoint an independent 3rd party to ensure the remediation work is carried out in a fair manner. CG will undertake (a) an Investigation to Identify whether or not consumers have been affected by any breaches of contractual and/or regulatory obligations applicable at the relevant time as a result of the Issues Identified In paragraph 1.2 and, If so, the extent; and (b) a scheme for assessing the redress that would be appropriate in any Instances of breach

about time too http://www.fca.org.uk/news/fca-proposals-to-tackle-issues-in-gap-insurance-market

There is an opportunity for each and every CaG member to feedback to the FCA on issues that they have faced with Lenders handling of any regulated mortgage here: http://www.fca.org.uk/news/dp14-2-fairness-of-changes-to-mortgage-contracts No feedback = No Voice! The deadline is the 30th September 2014. Apple

http://www.insuranceage.co.uk/insurance-age/news/2379614/fca-fines-and-bans-three-former-swinton-senior-executives?utm_term=&utm_content=FCA%20fines%20and%20bans%20three%20former%20Swinton%20senior%20executives&utm_campaign=IA.Daily_RL.EU.A.U&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IA.DCM.Editors_Updates "Ban follows enforcement action in 2013 and Halpin, Bowyer and Clare have been barred from senior roles at FCA regulated firms. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has fined three former senior executives of Swinton Group a combined total of £928,000 and banned them from performing various roles at financial services firms. The FCA's action follows previous enforcement action taken against Swinton in 2013 when the company was fined £7.4m after it adopted an aggressive sales strategy that resulted in mis-sales of monthly add-on insurance policies. A culture of pushing for high sales and increased profit without regard for customers had developed at Swinton according to the regulator. Peter Halpin, former chief executive of Swinton, was fined £412,700 and is banned from acting as chief executive of a financial services firm. Anthony Clare, the former finance director, was fined £208,600 and is banned from performing significant influence functions at financial services firms. And the same ban has also been placed on Nicholas Bowyer, former marketing director, who was fined £306,700. Competence All three have been banned on the basis of showing a lack of competence in their respective former roles. Tracey McDermott, director of enforcement and financial crime at the FCA, said: "A culture was allowed to develop within Swinton that pushed for high sales and increased profit without regard to the impact on the firm's customers. "We expect firms to put customers at the heart of their business. These three directors should have recognised the risk to customers and redressed the balance so that the drive to maximise profits did not jeopardise the fair treatment of customers. "Those with significant influence within firms are responsible for setting the tone and the culture; they set the example that others will follow. Action "Today's enforcement action should serve as a timely reminder to those at the very top of firms that the FCA is determined to hold individuals to account where they fall short of the standard we require." A statement from Halpin reads: "I sincerely regret any possible unintended detriment suffered by customers. "I acted in good faith at all times and it is of some significant comfort that the Regulator did not impugn my integrity, nor find that my conduct was improperly motivated by incentive arrangements". Swinton was also fined £770,000 in 2009 for failures in its sales of PPI"

Regulator orders Banks and mutuals to review complaints about not cancelling recurring payments from November 2009. Consumers who have set up a regular payment from their account will now be able to successfully cancel that arrangement by contacting their card provider, the Financial Conduct Authority said. The FCA has been examining how easy it is for customers to cancel Continuous Payment Authorities (CPAs) due either to payday lenders or for other regular payments such as subscriptions or gym memberships. CPAs, which are also commonly called recurring transactions or recurring payments, are relatively easy to set up but can be hard to cancel, causing problems for consumers trying to manage their finances,the FCA said. Now, following the FCA review of how the largest high street banks and mutuals process requests to cancel CPAs, they have agreed that they will ensure that when a customer asks for a recurring payment to end, that will be sufficient to cancel the arrangement. They have also confirmed that should a payment go through by mistake following cancellation by a customer the customer will be refunded immediately. In addition to securing this commitment, the largest banks and mutuals have agreed to review every individual complaint they have received about the non-cancellation of a CPA and to pay redress where payments have continued to be made despite the customer cancelling the arrangement. This applies to all complaints since November 2009 when the Financial Services Authority, the FCA’s predecessor, began regulating banking conduct. Clive Adamson, the FCA’s director of supervision, said: “It’s important that consumers are confident that banks are meeting their everyday banking needs. Today customers can be confident that when they ask for a Continuous Payment Authority to be cancelled – it will be cancelled - and that it can be done easily. “We recognise that historically this is an area where some customers have struggled but the banks and mutuals have responded positively to our work on this issue. From now on we expect them to be getting this right. In addition, they have committed to review past complaints.” http://www.ftadviser.com/2013/06/28/regulation/regulators/fca-banks-have-to-cancel-recurring-payments-if-requested-UxbeHUuYQIy0SEYbGRE4tJ/article.html

What does this story actually mean for us. Banks to reopen 2.5m PPI claims after FCA inquiry I have a claim against Capital One which they made me a final offer in October 2013. Due to a few personal reasons I did not put it back to the Ombudsman until this month and Capital One have admitted that it was incorrectly calculated but are saying it is time barred so the FOS cannot get them to recalculate. Does this story mean that they will be contacting me and coming clean about the miscalculation (I very much doubt this)? Will they be forced to open all claims where the amount was disputed? I fear that without the teeth behind it then not much will happen and who is going to be able to force the banks into recalculating - is it the FOS or the FCA? How is the FCA involved in all this. Can we complain to the FCA, in one case against Mastercard they have lied to me throughout the whole process so if they receive complaints then I will do this. Don't suppose anyone has an email for Martin Wheatley, chief executive at the FCA?

http://www.fca.org.uk/news/fca-fines-rbs-and-natwest-for-failures-in-mortgage-advice-process

http://www.fca.org.uk/news/fca-proposes-price-cap-for-payday-lenders The FCA’s key proposals are as follows: 1. Initial cost cap of 0.8% per day. For new loans, or loans rolled over, interest and fees must not exceed 0.8% of the amount borrowed. This lowers the costs for those borrowers paying a daily interest rate above the initial cost cap. 2. Fixed default fees capped at £15 – Protects borrowers struggling to repay. If borrowers cannot repay their loans on time, fees must not exceed £15. Interest on unpaid balances and default fees must not exceed 0.8% per day of the outstanding amount. 3. Total cost cap of 100% - Protects borrowers from escalating debts. Borrowers must never have to pay back more in fees and interest than the amount borrowed.

I have been asked to be a witness for FCA at the end of year or early 2015. Even though the prospect terrifies me, I still remember the distress I was caused. Has anyone else been a witness and can advise me please

The FCA sent me this link so I can check on what DCA is what and if they have any complaints and much more hope it is of help to anyone http://fca-consumer-credit-interim.force.com/CS_RegisterSearchPageNew Or this one http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmSearchForm.do MM

A crackdown on the use of pre-ticked boxes to sell "add-on" insurance products is planned after it was found that consumers are being overcharged by up to £200 million a year. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has unveiled a package of proposals to shake up the way in which insurance is bolted on to major purchases such as cars, holidays, mobile phones, home insurance and credit cards. The add-on insurance industry is worth around £1 billion, but an investigation by the FCA found many consumers are not shopping around to compare the cost of these insurance products and they are potentially paying up to £200 million annually for products they may never need. The FCA's plans include banning pre-ticked boxes to ensure people have to actively choose to buy an add-on and forcing firms to publish claims ratios, which could spell out more clearly to customers what financial benefit they might expect to gain as a result of buying the product. http://money.uk.msn.com/news/add-on-insurance-crackdown-planned

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26539569

http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/news-and-analysis/regulation/fca-hits-insurance-broker-with-30m-fine-over-misselling/2006613.article

Can't the above be excluded from the "new postings" search as wading through several pages of this every day is getting boring!

I know it is only once a week the FCA posts the firms to avoid but today this went over 5 pages. While it is vitally important that people are informed of companies to avoid, could this not be done with just one link to the relevant forum?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23791252

Just wondering with the FSA being closed down and restarted as the FCA. How will this affect the way we use BCOBS when dealing with the banks?

Great news I just noticed over on MSE that doesn't seem to have been posted here. http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/banking/2013/04/card-protection-and-id-protection-mis-selling-now-banks-will-have-to-refund-victims The gist of this is that the FCA have now decided that the financial institutions who got people signed up for CPP are also responsible for mis-selling and will have to refund their customers. The article says "Those mis-sold are entitled to whatever they paid out." but doesn't mention statutory interest or any interest that may have been charged on what was paid out. Does anyone know how that works?

Why the FCA is a joke: http://www.ianfraser.org/paul-moore-why-john-griffith-jones-must-go/