FCA Consultation on Fees & Levies for 2024/25

Members may have seen that the FCA issued their annual consultation on the fees charged to firms on Tuesday 9th March – AMI comments…

Consumer Duty has made vulnerability about ‘characteristics’ rather than ‘binary’

Chloe Timperley’s comments from the British Specialist Lending Senate 2024 regulatory expectations around vulnerability…

Your March update from AMI Chief Executive Robert Sinclair

AMI Chief Executive Robert Sinclair gives his March update, including the Mortgage Charter and the FCA annual business plan…

Sexism in the City feedback: recommendations for firms

The feedback report for the September Sexism in the City paper has been released. We are cited in the report, relating to our event code of conduct…

AI will not replace ‘divergent or creative’ thinking

Chloe Timperley’s comments from the British Specialist Lending Senate 2024 on generative AI and regulatory expectations around vulnerability…

Mortgage Brokers: The climate is changing, should you?

The Mortgage Climate Action Group (MCAG) is delighted to invite you to its upcoming webinar: ‘The Climate is Changing, Should You?’ on 18th March at 10am…

Edit Content

Log in here for full access to all our great content

 

Please log in below with your username (which is your email address), using all lower-case letters.

 

Forgotten your password?
No problem, simply tell us you have forgotten your password to receive instructions instantly via email.

Having problems logging in?
If you are a current member but are unable to login, please first make sure you are using all lower-case letters for your username/email address. If you still have difficulties, please contact us via email at info@a-m-i.org.uk so we can rectify your problem.

Not a member?
Learn more about the benefits of becoming a member or apply online and we will be in touch.

FOS has now published proposals for its future funding having considered stakeholders’ feedback and the principles FOS has established in its previous conversations.

It is proposing to rebalance the levy and case fee to aim for a 50:50 split, with a significantly greater proportion of their income from the FOS levy as opposed to case fees.  This will mean that all firms will pay a larger levy, with the largest firms paying most, thus retaining the principle that businesses who generate the most demand for their service in terms of individual cases should contribute more towards FOS’s costs.  FOS believes that reducing the reliance on income from case fees supports their management of complexity in the complaints as PPI subsides.  It also feels that the change will protect FOS from the volatility of demand for their services.

There are no proposals to change the case fee level from the existing £550 per case, based on assumptions of complaint volumes.  The proposal to leave the case fee unchanged seems sensible but perhaps FOS should reconsider an increased fee for higher users and also the possibility of a ‘quality measure’ that would deliver different pricing bands.  A core band of £550 per case if the overturn rate in the previous year was between say 30% and 50%.  Those with overturn rates higher should pay 50% more, those with an overturn rate less than 30% pay 50% less

It is proposing to reduce the level of ‘free’ cases from 25 to 10 per firm.  FOS states that most of the smallest firms have never reached the 25 threshold, are unlikely to have more than 10 and many have none.  Mortgage firms might be concerned that it would be inappropriate to change the ‘free’ case levels for firms at a time when they are experiencing significant interest in historic mortgage sales from numerous CMCs.  It also means that those who have more than 10 cases will see their costs rise substantially.  The plans need deeper financial modelling.

Robert Sinclair
August 2019

X

Forgot Password?

Join Us