Opinion  

Your Shout: Letters to the editor

Financial Adviser Letters

Financial Adviser Letters

Yes, I know this is the maximum that TPR can levy for this kind of offence – but for heaven’s sake, the FCA should be spotless when it comes to this sort of thing.

Harry Katz

Ha7 Consulting

 

Unfair levy

On what planet does anyone seriously think that it is fair to penalise the innocent for the utter, and ongoing, failings of the industry regulator (‘Outcry grows as advisers’ FSCS bills soar again’, Jan 29)?

Making matters a whole lot worse though is the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, which continues to provide huge settlements for clients based upon their own unqualified judgements.

Do they not understand that they are wrecking our industry – or is it just their plan to force the public back into the hands of those trusty bankers?

Name and address supplied

 

Woodford debacle

As an IFA for many years I find the handling of this deplorable (‘Woodford investors face £10m wind up cost’, Jan 30). 

Many people are facing a substantial loss on their investment and it is the IFAwho will no doubt be held responsible when the complaints start rolling in.

Where was the FCA while all this was going on? How can Neil Woodford get away with millions of pounds in fees when the fund had been suspended ?

No doubt the fees for winding up the fund will also be deducted from investors’ already diluted pots.

My opinion is that a full inquiry into the goings on in this fund should be conducted and Mr Woodford held accountable. At the very least he should be made to refund the fees he withdrew while the fund was being suspended.

Name and address supplied

 

‘Legal’ CMCs

I read with interest your article setting out the scourge CMCs are to financial services (‘PFS reveals adviser concerns on CMCs’, Jan 23). I wondered if you had considered the greater issue faced by financial services companies, namely the so-called ‘legal CMCs’, which fall under the wing of the Solicitors Regulation Authority?

The SRA-authorised CMCs tend first to serve firms with a data subject access request in order to establish if they have any possible legal claim case against the firm involved before hitting them with a preliminary notice of a professional negligence claim.

My concern is that the SRA appears to exercise very little control over legal CMCs and they appear to be free to dress up highly speculative and spurious compensation claims under the guise of genuine legal claims, from which they stand to gain a high rate of return should any compensation be paid out to the customer they represent.