FSA postpones approved persons regime

3 December 2010 | By Natalie Thomas

The Financial Services Authority has announced that it is delaying implementing its approved persons regime for mortgage brokers and bank staff until 2012/2013.

In June 2010 as part of the Mortgage Market Review it announced that it would be extending the approved persons’ regime to include anyone who advises on or sells mortgages.  

it says it remain committed to making these changes to the approved persons’ regime, but as part of its ongoing reprioritisation of work; particularly around the regulatory reform agenda, it is deferring introduction of the changes to 2012/2013.   

In a statement on its website, it says: “Once the rules are finalised, we will give firms sufficient time to put changes in place to comply with the approved persons’ regime, as with any new rules.  

“We will be publishing a full economic analysis of all our Mortgage Market Review proposals next year which will inform the final rules.”

Robert Sinclair, director of the Association of Mortgage Intermediaries, says it is a big shift that was unexpected.

He says: “We’re not talking about a few months but a couple of years. We were expecting this in either 2010 or 2011. Our concern is that this was part of initial proposals that had industry consensus but it has deferred this without any explanation.

“It can only be one of two things, either the FSA’s computer system isn’t working properly or it is worried about European regulation.”

But Michael Coogan, director general at the CML, says: “With improved professionalism and a range of mortgage issues out to consultation, it is sensible to make changes affecting individual sellers all at the same time.

“Bearing in mind the fact that firms would prefer to be able to budget and plan ahead for change, we are pleased to see the FSA taking a sensible and pragmatic approach on this issue for 2011.”

If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Mortgage Strategy and Follow @mortgagestrat

Readers' comments (18)

Anonymous | 3 Dec 2010 2:07 pm
This is not good news. The quicker we get the last cowboys out of our industry, the better...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Simon Honey | 3 Dec 2010 2:18 pm
Is this because the Banks say that they are not ready and need more time.

Of course if Brokers & IFA's are not ready they go out of business, Banks do not!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3 Dec 2010 2:23 pm
Is this for the publics benefit or just for the Banks and the FSA?

Botton line is they probably can't handle all the paperwork it will require.

Isn't it strange that the FSA can put in huge amounts of time and resourse and priority into hounding small IFA's out of the industry (through RDR) who create very little client detriment in terms of poor advice, claims etc, but they cannot afford the resource to sorting out the Banks, who create the largest source of client detriment, claims, financial enforcement fines etc, and mortgage brokers who increasingly are being found wanting in their advice process.

Rather than concerns for the publics' wellbeing, it seems the FSA are more interested in saving face and finishing what they have started, however wrong and ill conceived and neglecting issues that actually cause the public harm.

But there again where did this recession start, Oh yes, with the Banks and a regulator not doing what they should be.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Gary Watts, Which Network Ltd | 3 Dec 2010 2:28 pm
Oh dear, is this not typical, when you look at the dogs breakfast of MMR in its entirety. One of the few proposals in it which most people agreed could have genuinely helped the public and would have been a positive step towards cleaning up the industry and the FSA puts it on hold for up to 2 years
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3 Dec 2010 2:44 pm
They'll be telling us next that the lenders can carry on giving unqualified advice - and oh you Mortgage Brokers need to be DipMap qualified within 12 months! The fact of the matter is if Banks had to have all staff qualified there wouldn't be enough staff to go round would there? then they'd have to pay a living wage to the ones that they would all be fighting over - meanwhile who would be picking up the business - wouldn't be the Brokers would it? We can't have that can we!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
dave | 3 Dec 2010 3:30 pm
I see this announcement as good news.

The requirement to approve all advisers would be costly and take time when all they need is to compile a list of mortgage advisers on the Register (i.e. without the need to go through the full approved persons process). It would be the firms responsibility to notify the FSA when someone joins or leaves - on pain of a hefty fine if they fail.

The FSA would therefore know who was where but without the massive cost - why, when there is a choice, do they always choose the option that is the most complex and costs the most money?

If this solution is provded to be unsuitable, they could always try the full approved persons regime later.

Or is this idea too sensible?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3 Dec 2010 3:35 pm
OH dear. I think the foregoing comments have hit the nail on the head. BANKS BANKS BANKS!!!!.....the sooner the FSA goes the better
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Sheppard, Perception Finance | 3 Dec 2010 3:52 pm
What a disappointing decision this is. One of the truly good elements to the MMR and pressure seems to have led to this being pushed back.

The consumer, in my opinion, deserves the protection and comfort of knowing that anyone talking to them about taking on the commitment of a mortgage is qualified and individually regulated as well as the organisation that they work for. This is the only way to ensure that those who are not delivering cannot then just reappear somewhere else. With this I am talking about brokers as well as those that work for retail banks.

Recently I have had clients come to me that had already approached banks directly and seen some shocking KFI's that had been issued (including one for a 2 year interest only mortgage due to the client being 72 and this being the longest term this lender could offer).

The new name that the Coalition Government is giving to this organisation includes the words 'Consumer Protection'. What better way to get ready for this than to push this one element through?

I would urge the FSA to reconsider this which needs to be done to enhance professionalism with the whole mortgage process but more importantly to show that the customer does deserve to be treated fairly.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter Turner | 3 Dec 2010 7:46 pm
Am I not correct in thinking the FSA is supposed to be abolished by the end of 2012?

Lets hope the replacement is sufficiently numerate to realise that 2013 comes AFTER 2012.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter Turner | 3 Dec 2010 7:46 pm
Am I not correct in thinking the FSA is supposed to be abolished by the end of 2012?

Lets hope the replacement is sufficiently numerate to realise that 2013 comes AFTER 2012.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment