FSA Annual Report 2006/07 - Better Regulation Ltd

Section six – Appendices
Appendix 3
125
All stage one investigations are conducted by a member of staff not involved
in the matter complained of. If a complaint investigation identifies an error
or shortfall in our procedures or processes we take appropriate action; this
may involve changing a procedure or reviewing the way we work. The main
scheme allows us to offer an ex-gratia payment if appropriate.
The Commissioner’s reports on individual cases which he has investigated
under stage two of the scheme are normally published on his website
www.fscc.gov.uk/, and our responses to these reports are published on our
website at:
www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/library/other_publications/complaints/index.shtml
What the scheme does not cover
The scheme does not allow us to investigate complaints about certain issues,
including:
(a) the performance of our legislative functions under FSMA or previous
legislation;
(b) the actions, or inactions, of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) or
the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS); and
(c) the FSA’s relationship with its employees.
We may defer the investigation of complaints where the matter is the subject
of ongoing action by the FSA or another agency, or we can refer the
complaint if it would be more appropriately dealt with in another way. We
can also decline to investigate a complaint if we believe that the matter
amounts to no more than dissatisfaction with our general policies or our
exercise of discretion, where no misconduct is alleged.
Main events during the period
We concluded 241 complaints, comprising 378 allegations. The number of
complaint allegations from consumers (197) outnumbered those from
authorised firms (139). We received 42 allegations from other sources, such
as trade bodies, solicitors, and unauthorised firms.
The majority of complaint allegations from authorised firms were from
general insurance intermediaries and small IFAs. A significant number of
complaints from firms were about mandatory electronic reporting,
particularly the administrative fee charged for late submission of returns,
and fee collection. Fee collection complaints have typically been about fees
levied on firms that either cancel authorisation after the 31 March
cancellation deadline or do not alert us to changes in their number of
approved persons before the 31 December deadline. The onus is on firms to
comply with our Rules, which clearly set out deadlines by which firms
should inform us of their intentions; consequently these complaints cannot
be upheld except in extreme circumstances. Other recurring complaints were
about poor customer service, our supervision of firms, the authorisation and
cancellation processes, and our enforcement process.