"PI insurance is no magic wand for FSCS funding" "PI insurance is no magic wand for FSCS funding"

31 Jan 2017 Ken Davy

Sometimes it can be useful to mix metaphors in order to make a point and, in the case of the FCA’s current review of the FSCS funding, I believe it is absolutely essential.

While speculating in the Consultation Paper about the possibility of forcing changes on professional indemnity (PI) insurers may be a genuine attempt to broaden the debate, it is, at best, unhelpful and, at worst, an unnecessary complication that demonstrates a misunderstanding of the way the PI insurance (PII) market works.

On the face of it, the suggestion of enforcing PI insurers to provide broader cover might look attractive

Unfortunately, however, the PII market relies on individual insurers risking their backers’ hard cash by providing cover that delivers a reasonable balance of risk and reward.  The moment you attempt to force the insurers to accept risks they don't wish to cover, they will simply exit the market completely.

On the face of it, the suggestion of enforcing PI insurers to provide broader cover might look attractive.  

Are the memories of the regulators and the Treasury so short as to have forgotten the lessons of 2002/3 when the PII market virtually ceased to function for the IFA sector? The result was that between 2000 and 3000 firms regulated by the FSA were priced out of the market by hikes in premiums of tenfold or more. So dramatic was the withdrawal of PI insurers from the market that, despite it being a legal requirement under the FSA's rules for a firm to carry appropriate PI insurance, the regulator turned a blind eye to firms who were unable to obtain cover.

This logjam was only broken when, in mid-2003, SimplyBiz, through a reinsurance mechanism, offered to underwrite 95 per cent of the PI risk for directly regulated firms. The success of this creative solution was, I am delighted to say, acknowledged by the FSA in a 2003 Consultation Paper.

This ultimately led to the development of a more stable and competitive PII market which, while still not without cost, has served advisers and consumers reasonably well in recent years. It would be a sorry outcome of the FSCS funding review if we create a much fairer funding method only to end up with ridiculously expensive PII costs for advisers. I urge the Treasury and the FCA to keep their focus on restructuring the current system to eliminate its grotesque unfairness to IFAs, rather than chasing red herrings through ever muddier waters.

Ken Davy is chairman of SimplyBiz


Testimonials

"In a world where people are ready to complain at a drop of a hat, I just felt it was appropriate to give credit where credit is due and on the whole I feel that SimplyBiz do a very good job."

Lawrence Hayward
Leicestershire

Read More

Latest News

"Please, Mr Provider, could we have some more?"

May 23, 2018

When Dickens’ Oliver Twist famously said “Please, sir, I want some more”, every reader or audience member knew that there was plenty available and his need for ‘more’ should have been satisfied. I feel somewhat the same in respect of the outcome of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme review.

Read more >

Liz Coyle: Your Senior Managers & Certification Regime refresher

May 17, 2018

Liz Coyle, Compliance Policy Manager for The SimplyBiz Group, recaps the key aspects of next year's big rules change.

Read more >

SimplyBiz Group's Centra investment system has attracted 1500 users

May 14, 2018

Dan Russell, MD of SimplyBiz Investment Services, expresses his delight with the speed and enthusiasm with which Centra, the end-to-end investment service, has been embraced by advisers.

Read more >

"Ending 'phoenixing' is a matter of political will"

May 10, 2018

The government minister, Robert Jenrick, recently highlighted that the practice of ‘phoenixing’ can be deeply corrosive to public trust in the system which is progressively passed on to the whole of our economy. While this is undoubtedly true, what I find so depressing is that after all these years the debate had to take place at all.

Read more >