Cp1230 FSA consultation paper summary: complaints against the regulators


Published on

This will be of interest to all firms and individuals that will come under the new UK regulators as regulated, registered or authorised.

The FSA are currently required to make arrangements for the “investigation of complaints arising in connection with the exercise of, or failure to exercise, any of its functions (other than its legislative functions)” under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).

The latest version of the Financial Services Bill requires the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), and the Bank of England to establish how they will investigate complaints against themselves.
The Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA) jointly published a 34-page Consultation Paper (CP) 12/30 entitled ‘Complaints against the regulators – (The Bank of England, Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority)’, on 6 November 2012.

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Cp1230 FSA consultation paper summary: complaints against the regulators

  1. 1. CP12/30 FSA Consultation PaperSummary: Complaints against the regulators A CEI Compliance FSA Consultation Papers Summary
  2. 2. What Is It All About?This will be of interest to all firms and individuals that will come underthe new UK regulators as regulated, registered or authorised.BackgroundThe FSA are currently required to make arrangements for the“investigation of complaints arising in connection with theexercise of, or failure to exercise, any of its functions (otherthan its legislative functions)” under the Financial Services andMarkets Act 2000 (FSMA).Identified as “an effective and efficient way of dealing withcomplaints” the current FSA complaints scheme has been inoperation for over a decade. The requirements set out in Part6 of the Financial Services Bill closely mirror those in FSMA,which shows that the proposal to adopt a very similarapproach for the new scheme has been recommended.
  3. 3. What Is It All About?The latest version of the Financial Services Bill requires theFinancial Conduct Authority (FCA), the Prudential RegulationAuthority (PRA), and the Bank of England to establish howthey will investigate complaints against themselves.The Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA)jointly published a 34-page Consultation Paper (CP) 12/30entitled ‘Complaints against the regulators – (The Bank ofEngland, Financial Conduct Authority and PrudentialRegulation Authority)’, on 6 November 2012.It is proposed to delete the existing section, COAF, in the FSAhandbook, and the new regulators will instead simply publishthe relevant material concerning the new Scheme on theirrespective websites.
  4. 4. So What Does It Say?The requirements for a Complaints Scheme, in Part 6 of theFinancial Services Bill, closely follow the contemporary FSAarrangements, and consist of two primary elements:-• investigation of a complaint by the regulators themselves; and• investigation of the complaint by an independent person (referred to as the Complaints Commissioner).The relevant functions of the FCA and the PRA that are to beinvestigated are their functions with the exception of theirlegislative functions. The relevant functions of the Bank ofEngland are its functions under Part 18 of FSMA (recognisedclearing houses) or under Part 5 of the Banking Act 2009(inter-bank payment systems), also with the exception of itslegislative functions.
  5. 5. So What Does It Say?Processes in addition to the basic scheme will enable theregulators to investigate complaints where allegations havebeen made against any multiple of them.Understandably t the regulators are committed to dealing withall complainants fairly and equally. Typically there will be nocharge made by the regulators, or by the ComplaintsCommissioner, to those who use the new scheme.Complaints against the regulators will be dealt with within fourweeks or, if and where this is not possible, they will write tothe complainant within this time, setting out a timetable fordealing with the complaint.The regulators are apparently totally committed totransparency in the arrangements of the proposed Schemeand will publish data on levels of compliance with their servicestandards and other information annually.
  6. 6. So What Does It Say?Any complainant who is dissatisfied with the outcome of theregulators’ investigation, or who considers that the regulatorsare taking too long without explanation, will be entitled torefer the complaint to the Complaints Commissioner.The regulators will cooperate with each other to ensure thatthe proposed scheme operates as one. This will be particularlyrelevant when they are required to investigate complaintsincorporating allegations against more than one of the them.The FCA will process complaints submitted centrally throughthe published complaints helpline number or email address.Even if the complaint is about one of the other regulators, theywill be responsible for recording details of the complaint andassigning it to the relevant regulator(s) for action.
  7. 7. What Next?There are a number of areas also discussed, mainlyconcerning legal cutover limits and transitionalprocedures, as well as the nomination of a ComplaintCommissioner.For full details read the document on the FSS website atwww.fsa.gov.ukComments are requested by 6/2/2013.The FSA will then consider the responses and publish aPolicy Statement, summarising that feedback and settingout the new scheme in its entirety.
  8. 8. What Is This Presentation This is a regulatory summary service provided by CEI Compliance Limited, The UK’s Fastest Growing Regulatory Consultancy We can only advise on the salient points in this summary and if you want further details then we would suggest you access the full document from the FSA Website at www.fsa.govuk
  9. 9. Isnt Bigger, Better?Generally, No.Its usually just more expensiveFortunately, there are more positive alternatives tousing a niche consultancy compared to the Accentures,McKinseys or the big accountancy firms like Deloitte, E&Yetc.We not only consider that size doesn’t matter, but largesize can actually be a disadvantage in meeting yourneeds.
  10. 10. Dealing with a nicheconsultancyYou are always dealing with the principal when you aredealing with my firm. This means that I am the relationshipmanager and there is no junior partner to whom responsibilitywill be transferred. There is no decreased accountability, no"hand-off" to a less-informed colleague. If your interests are atstake continually, shouldn’t you reasonably expect mycontinual involvement?We can usually provide resources on a "just in time"basis. That is, our projects do not have to cover excessiveoverhead, such as multiple offices, large administrativebackup, recruiting, partner perks, etc. We are organized toefficiently provide everything that you, as the buyer needs, butnothing more than that which means that you are paying forvalue and results and only minimum overhead.
  11. 11. Dealing with a nicheconsultancyThere is more likelihood of your privacy andconfidentiality being observed with fewer peopleworking on the project. We (and/or the few people wemight also involve) are constant which means that thereisn’t the need to sift through dozens of differingperceptions.We’re faster. We can respond to requests quickly, andreturn all calls within four hours which means to youthat there is no need to worry about a bureaucracy,delays and unknown people on the other end of thephone.
  12. 12. Dealing with a nicheconsultancySince we handle fewer concurrent projects than larger firms,our attention is focused on the job at hand. This means thatyou don’t have to "compete" with another dozen or so of ourclients, which may be larger, paying more or are more time-demanding. We structure our work so that every clientreceives maximum attention.Your investment is controlled. There is no "meterrunning". We work for a fixed, value-based, project fee.Large firms can’t afford to do that as readily because of all thepeople involved and their own insistence on measuring theirsuccess by billable hours. We measure our success by clientobjectives reached, not in “time units”.
  13. 13. Dealing with a nicheconsultancyThe expertise that larger firms use is often white-labellingfor them by a pool of consultants available in themarketplace at any one time. We select our consultantsfrom practising subject matter experts whichmeans that you obtain the same or better expertise forless money, because;Inevitably, we are less expensive. There areeconomies to using someone who can base their fees oneach situation and not on a pre-determined service scaleor need for reaching a practice quota. This means quitesimply better value to you.
  14. 14. And, additionallyThe benefits of dealing with the “ComplianceDoctor” and CEI Compliance is;A firm with experienced and qualified formeradvisers;A firm that can apply changes and needs in acommon sense way that is practical andeffective;A firm that is considered and respected asindependent and reliable by the FSA;A firm that provides you with unfettered accessto the principle immediately and on demand;
  15. 15. Questions? More Information? CEI Compliance Limited Call 0800 689 9 689 Email info@ceicompliance.co.uk