We have updated our Privacy Policy and our Cookies Policy. The cookies that we use make our website work and helps us to analyse how the site is used by our visitors and improve our services.
Allow activity tracking?
I want to manage my cookies - Find out more
As well as proactively campaigning, the BSA frequently comments on consultative papers issued by the Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority, and by Government departments such as the Treasury or the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
Keep in touch
Join our mailing list to receive alerts as new content is published.
Sign up for alerts.
The clear conclusion is that, since there are ample rules, law and duties to protect UK financial service customers, there is no need for an additional duty of care. Therefore, we do not support the proposal.
We agree with the spirit of the consultation which addresses a potential gap in protection for consumers choosing to apply for home finance via a Peer to Peer (P2P) platform.
We are urging the FCA to adopt a more targeted and proportional approach, focused on those consumers which it identifies as suffering substantial detriment and the firms which are responsible for that.
An overall observation is that, in a competitive market, prices and charges will inevitably vary from product-to-product and firm-to-firm. There is a limit to how far regulators or government should intervene in pricing practices within industries that are competitive, wellregulated and have a strong ombudsman service – and where firms have provided customers with all relevant information and there are no unfair barriers to changing products.
Order introducing senior non-preferred debt for MREL purposes. BSA supports the SI's approach.
The BSA's response to FCA CP 18/19
We point out the lack of independent oversight and lack of appeal for taxpayers. We also question the timing and process of the proposals.