hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Jun 24, 2019 19:52:01 GMT
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Jun 24, 2019 19:54:04 GMT
The City watchdog has been handed an October deadline to respond to investors who lost thousands of pounds after following information on its own register, which later turned out to be incorrect.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is responsible for protecting consumers from unscrupulous firms, yet those who followed its official listing for Collateral UK, a peer-to-peer platform, saw their investment turn sour when the firm entered administration.
Telegraph Money has previously reported how investors poured thousands of pounds into Collateral, believing that the firm was approved by the FCA. It transpired that third parties had been able to manipulate the data on the regulator’s website to give the impression the firm had been authorised when this was not the case.
The firm collapsed when it became apparent that it did not have a licence required to take customers’ cash.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
Collateral investors who complained about the FCA's role in the saga had been told they would not receive a response until after the regulator's investigation into the company’s collapse was complete.
This would potentially have left investors waiting for months or even years for a response.
However, the Financial Complaints Commissioner has stepped in and set a time limit for the FCA to investigate and deal with these complaints.
The regulator would not comment on the specifics of the case, but said it would adhere to the October 8 deadline.
The FCA has faced criticism for its lack of action in the Collateral case. This newspaper revealed in May that the regulator took two months to close the firm down after it became aware of its rule breaking.
The amount of time the regulator takes to investigate failed firms has also come under the spotlight.
Earlier this year Nicky Morgan, chair of the influential Treasury Committee of MPs, called for the FCA to speed up its investigation into the collapse of London Capital & Finance (LCF).
The regulator said it may take a year to conduct its review but Ms Morgan said: “This cannot be kicked into the long grass.”
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on Jun 25, 2019 4:04:55 GMT
Well spotted hazellend for some strange reason I was expecting an article along those lines. As I have often said in this thread 'the work continues'. Now onto the Treasury Committee today where hopefully there might be something of interest ........... and if not 'Plan B' is already in place.
|
|
picnicman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 238
Likes: 215
|
Post by picnicman on Jun 25, 2019 10:02:29 GMT
hazellend - thanks for this - you are officially forgiven for calling me a 'sucker' on another thread Cheers P
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Jun 25, 2019 10:10:59 GMT
hazellend - thanks for this - you are officially forgiven for calling me a 'sucker' on another thread Cheers P Oops don’t remember that, hopefully I apologised!
|
|
keystone
Member of DD Central
Posts: 713
Likes: 575
|
Post by keystone on Jun 25, 2019 11:50:09 GMT
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Jun 25, 2019 12:40:13 GMT
Yeah, a whole two minutes, at the very end/conclusion. After two hours and forty one minutes of discussing Woodford, Hargreaves Lansdown, GRG, RBS, TSB, London Capital Finance, etc, etc.
We need MUCH more publicity about our Complaints with Asset Backed P2P Lending or we will be drowned out by the aforementioned bigger problems engulfing The FCA.
SO, again, everyone reading this, if you have suffered you must write to The FCA, FSCS, Complaints Commissioner, Treasury Committee, your MP, RICS (re dodgy Valuations) and everyone else you can think of - we need far more visibility!
It's not difficult with a "template" letter.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 25, 2019 12:48:27 GMT
Yeah, a whole two minutes, at the very end/conclusion. After two hours and forty one minutes of discussing Woodford, Hargreaves Lansdown, GRG, RBS, TSB, London Capital Finance, etc, etc.We need MUCH more publicity about our Complaints with Asset Backed P2P Lending or we will be drowned out by the aforementioned bigger problems engulfing The FCA. SO, again, everyone reading this, if you have suffered you must write to The FCA, FSCS, Complaints Commissioner, Treasury Committee, your MP, RICS (re dodgy Valuations) and everyone else you can think of - we need far more visibility!It's not difficult with a "template" letter. And don't forget Lendy! (If it's any comfort COL got marginally longer coverage, although not sure that's a prize to be pleased with.) Does highlight just how big the pond of financial 'dissatisfaction' is at the moment and just how small P2P, Lendy and COL are in comparison. I was mildly satisfied with the FCA's acknowledgement of their responsibilities and realisation that the Register wasn't fit for purpose. I don't get why he was so keen on the 'Interim Permission' emphasis. To my way of thinking, if a Firm is only on IP, they should be marked for greater scrutiny by the FCA and the Register cock-up should have not been allowed to happen (or, at least, not be allowed to remain on public display for so long).
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on Jun 25, 2019 12:50:42 GMT
Without going through that word for word, Col was never eligible for Interim Approval so I tend to think that Mr Bailey was winging it somewhat. I might be seeing something on that very subject later today ….. 2 minutes as ozboy has said was not nearly enough especially with the questions that were submitted, Plan B will be brought into play.
|
|
keystone
Member of DD Central
Posts: 713
Likes: 575
|
Post by keystone on Jun 25, 2019 13:04:36 GMT
This earlier section may be worth watching if you have 13 minutes to waste. FCA defence at Treasury Committee todayTalking about mini bonds but paraphrasing, 12% is high risk investment and investors should not be blaming the FCA. IFISA and we have the best most generous protection in the world! Enjoy
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Jun 25, 2019 13:12:40 GMT
This earlier section may be worth watching if you have 13 minutes to waste. FCA defence at Treasury Committee todayTalking about mini bonds but paraphrasing, 12% is high risk investment and investors should not be blaming the FCA. IFISA and we have the best protection in the world! Enjoy Rather missing the point that, however high the investment risk inherent in P2P, the FCA’s own website should not be helping crooks masquerade as an authorised platform.
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 717
Likes: 825
|
Post by 11025 on Jun 25, 2019 13:32:19 GMT
This earlier section may be worth watching if you have 13 minutes to waste. FCA defence at Treasury Committee todayTalking about mini bonds but paraphrasing, 12% is high risk investment and investors should not be blaming the FCA. IFISA and we have the best protection in the world! Enjoy Rather missing the point that, however high the investment risk inherent in P2P, the FCA’s own website should not be helping crooks masquerade as an authorised platform. Yes , Bailey seems to be very proud that any changes that occurred to the register were not done inside the FCA , very reassuring . It involves a sub register - really He says "I will be honest with you" far too frequently for my liking. Anyway it has been mentioned and it is out there which can't be a bad thing.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on Jun 25, 2019 14:54:00 GMT
.... It involves a sub register - really ..... That was an 'interesting admission', perhaps there are 2 or more 'registers', who would have thought it Now all I need is for the FCA to answer the FOI that they are sitting on and have been for some time, the more you dig the more you find.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Jun 25, 2019 14:58:44 GMT
Yeah, a whole two minutes, at the very end/conclusion. After two hours and forty one minutes of discussing Woodford, Hargreaves Lansdown, GRG, RBS, TSB, London Capital Finance, etc, etc.We need MUCH more publicity about our Complaints with Asset Backed P2P Lending or we will be drowned out by the aforementioned bigger problems engulfing The FCA. SO, again, everyone reading this, if you have suffered you must write to The FCA, FSCS, Complaints Commissioner, Treasury Committee, your MP, RICS (re dodgy Valuations) and everyone else you can think of - we need far more visibility!It's not difficult with a "template" letter. And don't forget Lendy! (If it's any comfort COL got marginally longer coverage, although not sure that's a prize to be pleased with.) Does highlight just how big the pond of financial 'dissatisfaction' is at the moment and just how small P2P, Lendy and COL are in comparison. I was mildly satisfied with the FCA's acknowledgement of their responsibilities and realisation that the Register wasn't fit for purpose. I don't get why he was so keen on the 'Interim Permission' emphasis. To my way of thinking, if a Firm is only on IP, they should be marked for greater scrutiny by the FCA and the Register cock-up should have not been allowed to happen (or, at least, not be allowed to remain on public display for so long). My thinking is that Bailey's warped thinking is that if The FCA can get a prosecution for unauthorised tampering with the Register then that's the end of it, he'll be happy with that, job done, The FCA being seen as having done something, and on to the next FCA problem Case, washing his hands of Collateral because in his mind the case is now closed - they've got a prosecution?!
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 25, 2019 16:32:51 GMT
My thinking is that Bailey's warped thinking is that if The FCA can get a prosecution for unauthorised tampering with the Register then that's the end of it, he'll be happy with that, job done, The FCA being seen as having done something, and on to the next FCA problem Case, washing his hands of Collateral because in his mind the case is now closed - they've got a prosecution?! My thinking is that a court case will only serve to highlight the FCA's deficiencies in this matter and they (he) will prefer to avoid that. (Sadly, probably a shoe-in for the BoE role, re: NM's closing comments, so this might not even play out under his 'watch'.) Easier to commit to the TSC to throw £5M at improving the register (not fixing it, mind - clearly it isn't broken ) and then throw another amount - £5M? maybe more? (but won't be the full shortfall) - at the 'victims' of the 'unauthorised tampering'. Compensation, improved service, no troublesome court nonsense that may detract from Bailey aspirations. Job done.
|
|