FSCS chairman open to structure review

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
FSCS chairman open to structure review

Marshall Bailey, who became chairman of the lifeboat scheme in 2018, told Financial Adviser the scheme would “welcome opportunities for review” as it was a chance to “work with parties who have a significant role to play”.

However, he stopped short of saying fundamental change to the levy system was necessary.

His comments come after the regulatory framework came under fire when the levy paid by the industry to fund the compensation scheme was hiked up once again.

Last month, advisers found out they were expected to pay £213m towards the FSCS levy for the coming year — almost 13 per cent more than the previous year.

The scheme said the increase was down to a rise in the number of self-invested personal pension claims and the level of complexity of such claims.

The hike has prompted a number of advisers to write to their MPs to challenge the way the scheme is funded and the FSCS has now been contacted by at least one politician, challenging the structure and the burden falling on advisers.

Ronnie Cowan, MP of Inverclyde, asked the Treasury what discussions officials in the exchequer have had with stakeholders and representatives from the Financial Conduct Authority on its review of the FSCS levy calculation.

I an written response, John Glen, MP for Salisbury, said it was for the FCA and the Prudential Regulation Authority to consider the "impact of the levies on the firms they regulate, acting in line with their statutory duties. The government has no role in setting the levy".

Mr Bailey said: “I welcome [the MP’s letter]. She’s doing the right thing by calling for this discussion.

“Let’s have it and do what we can. MPs play an important role in the legislation that has created the FSCS in the first place. We operate effectively within a system that has been set up by legislation and for any of that to change, we need to have a discussion.”

Mr Bailey said “we are where we are” but added that time had “moved on” from the original construct. He said he was happy to engage with stakeholders but stressed the scheme could “only influence where it has influence”.

He added: “If others can find ways of improving the system and can work with individuals to change that, then of course that will happen.”

When asked about how the FSCS could alleviate the levy burden on advisers, Caroline Rainbird, its chief executive, stressed the lifeboat scheme did not set the ways in which it was governed.

She said: “At the end of the day, the Financial Conduct Authority drives us forward and sets the basis on which we pay and on which levies are gathered from the industry.

“We’re very aware of the challenges and emotion around this subject currently and we’re aware that without the industry funding we wouldn’t be able to pay compensation.”

The FCA consulted on the way the FSCS is funded in 2016-17. At the time, it looked into the workings of a risk-based levy as well as the impact of professional indemnity insurance on the market.

Many advisers have rallied for a risk-based levy — where firms dealing in higher-risk products would pay more towards the cost of the FSCS — throughout the years, arguing this would counterbalance the feeling that the ‘good guys pay for the bad guys’.

Although it asked firms to report new data to help the regulator decide on whether to go ahead with the proposal, the City-watchdog ultimately decided against a risk-based levy structure.

Instead, it proposed providers should pay 25 per cent of the FSCS costs in a move to reduce the burden on advisers. Despite this, advisers’ levy costs have increased since the review.

Ms Rainbird said: “The area of focus needs to be what we can do collectively across the industry to reduce bad outcomes because that has the benefit for consumers and levy payers.

“The levy hike is down to the increase in the number of claims and complexity of those claims. The FCA is working hard and we are working with other players to work hard for the industry.”

The FSCS’s 'prevent' pillar — which has been in place since Mr Bailey took over as chairman almost two years ago — is a bid to minimise bad outcomes in the industry.

As part of the prevent programme, the scheme has worked with the FCA and other industry bodies to curb the level of phoenixing in the industry.

Since its inception the group has acted on 19 cases of phoenixing — so has stopped 19 previously defunct firms rejoining the industry — and has passed on data on 130 firms it suspects of phoenixing.

Ms Rainbird said: “I don't have a magic wand to fix the past. We need to make sure we can pay compensation fairly, because we need to get people back on track and restore their trust and confidence in the financial services industry.

“But we can work together to help, to see what we can do to make sure we collectively do something for the benefit of the[industry in the] future.”

imogen.tew@ft.com

What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on fa.letters@ft.com to let us know.