The Financial Conduct Authority has responded to concerns raised by pro-consumer lobby groups.
The Transparency Task Force (TTF) has accused regulators of failing to introduce private action into consumer obligations.
On Thursday, TTF founder and consumer advocate Andy Agatangelou said money marketing He said the consumer tax was “a step in the right direction, but not far enough.”
However, in its counterargument, the FCA said private action is still an option under consideration for businesses complying with its consumer obligation rule.
“We are not thinking private Right to action is required at this stage to ensure that consumers have access to prompt support and remedies. The Financial Ombudsman Service provides a much easier and less costly way for most consumers to resolve complaints and seek remedies.
“By improving overall consumer outcomes and levels of customer support, this mandate reduces the need for consumers to file complaints and seek remedies. The mandate is also a significant change and we believe the best approach is to give the industry enough time to implement it effectively. private action brought about.
“explicitly holds the options for private This includes reviewing the business against evidence that it has incorporated and complied with its consumer obligations. ” An FCA spokesperson said money marketing.
The FCA also responded to claims by consumer groups that duty of care should be included in consumer obligations, as required by the Financial Services Act 2021.
The regulator has “carefully considered the requirements of the Financial Services Act 2021 and is confident it has met them. , and clearly sets higher and clearer consumer protection standards in its interactions with customers.
“Under the Financial Services Act 2021, we had until 31 July 2022 to produce a mandatory final rule. The regulation we have produced fulfills this obligation.”
Responding to the TTF’s allegations that the regulator has not fully utilized its powers under the Treat Customers Fairly He said he would set a higher standard for protection.
“We believe that new principles and rules need to be reset to achieve the fundamental change in culture and behavior that we want.
“This mandate clearly sets higher and clearer consumer protection standards for all retail financial services companies, in all sectors, at every stage of their business and in their interactions with customers.
“Without having to develop and consult new sector-by-sector rules as we have done in the past, we have a stronger basis to intervene when we see inappropriate practices.
“We are asking companies, including senior management and boards, to explain this higher and clearer set of expectations,” the spokesperson said.
Agatan Jerow also said money marketing A Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the FCA regarding the Senior Manager Certification Scheme (SMCR) found the scheme to be “little used”.
However, the FCA noted in its response money marketing In a statement issued in March regarding SMCR enforcement.
An FCA spokesperson said: “SMCR’s success should not be judged by the total number of cases or the number leading to enforcement action, and it would be completely wrong to do so.
“The work we have done with companies shows that the SCMR has raised the bar across the industry, and the decline in case numbers reflects the fact that the regime is working as intended. Raising standards, by definition, is absolutely fundamental to delivering results-based regulatory improvement.”
FCA is Last month’s consumption tax guidance (July 27), it said it would “set higher and clearer consumer protection standards” across financial services.
This mandate includes requirements for companies to eliminate “rip-off” charges and fees, make it easier to switch or cancel products, and focus on the truly diverse needs of their customers, including those in vulnerable situations. It was
FCA gave Corporate 12 months – Until 31 July 2023 – Implement new rules.
FCA responds to consumer protection groups’ concerns about consumer obligations
Source link FCA responds to consumer protection groups’ concerns about consumer obligations