View more on these topics

MMR: One-off costs could cost industry up to £50m

Compliance costs for the Financial Services Authority’s Mortgage Market Review distribution and disclosure paper could amount to a one-off cost of up to £50m and a further £2m every year for the mortgage industry, an FSA-commissioned report shows.

In its cost benefit analysis of the proposals an FSA-commissioned report by Oxera shows costs are etsimated to be between £39m and £50m in one-off payments for firms.

It states: “Total compliance costs for the proposals for which draft rules are contained in this CP are estimated to be up to somewhere between £39m and £50m for one-off costs and up to £2m per annum for ongoing costs.”

The report states that sales standards will incur an additional £1m a year cost to firms and a one-off £0.8m cost.

But Oxera estimates that a significant majority of firms selling through a non-advised route already conduct an appropriateness assessment which is similar to that which we are consulting on.

This implies that a large proportion of non-advised sales already meet the proposed requirements.

The proposal to require all sellers, including those who do not give advice, to hold a Level 3 qualification, CeMap equivalent will cost between £17m and £28m as a one-off cost, which will fall on lenders who need to train non-advised mortgage sellers.

The report states : “Where we estimated that the cost per non-advised seller to get a qualification to be in the region of £5,600, including the opportunity cost of time. This implies one-off compliance costs of between £17m and £28m. These figures are conservative estimates since they assume no non-advised sellers currently active in the industry already hold a qualification.

“Actual costs are expected to be well below this range, given our evidence that most lenders require or encourage their non-advised sellers to have a qualification.

Complaince costs associated with simplifying the labels currently in place so they broadly align with those used in the retail investment sector have been estimated by Oxera at £17m.

Oxera estimates that most firms will retain their ‘current’ status with ‘whole of market’ firms becoming ‘independent’ and ‘limited and single’ firms becoming ‘restricted’.

The replacement of the Initial Disclosure Document and Key Facts Illustration requirements will cost £1.7m as a one-off and £0.7m every year.

Changes to record keeping is estimated to cost £0.3m every year.

The FSA estimates it will also cost itself a one-off cost of £175,000.


Insolvencies will soar as cuts bite, says debt charity

The Debt Advice Foundation has warned that the number of people facing insolvency could rocket by 20% following the outcome of the government’s spending review. With speculation that 500,000 public sector jobs could be lost by 2014, the charity believes that al-though personal insolvency figures have fallen for the second consecutive quarter, the country is […]

Leeds launches shared ownership deal

Leeds Building Society is launching a shared ownership mortgage product, which has been designed to help first-time buyers onto the housing ladder, with a competitive fixed rate for shared ownership of only 5.99%.

A funny old year

The past 12 months have been turbulent – just take a look at this chart of the FTSE 100 over the last year. There have been some points which I’m sure would have caused your clients some concern, and possibly even had them looking for an alternative investment with reduced volatility; perhaps without reducing their […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up
  • Post a comment
  • John Hooper 16th November 2010 at 10:50 pm

    Have already left after 21 years of an unblemished career!!

  • Dazed & Confused 16th November 2010 at 3:09 pm

    “One Off Costs will cost the industry £10m”

    “The FSA estimates it will also cost itself a one-off cost of £175,000.”

    Well…that is really big of them! I guess that they will cover those costs with a couple of quick fines to the half a dozen brokers still trading…

  • vp73 16th November 2010 at 2:42 pm

    This is a very serious question, who is going to pay for this? If it is the advisors as per usual then I am sorry, but I for one am running my business on a very tight budget now and cannot afford any further costs. My income has fallen by 75% and this industry has not seen the bail outs other have. I genuinely cannot afford any increased costs so if our fees go up unfortunately there will be another good advisor leaving the industry. Lets be honest, all that will remain at this rate is sharks and the banks (another name for sharks) and then where will consumers be when it comes to wanting quality advice. The FSA is killing off a needed consumer service.

  • alastair lyon 16th November 2010 at 2:22 pm

    and what is their track record for getting these cost projections right]

    choose your own multiple for the real costs