The Stench of Corruption and Greed Overwhelms Britain's Financial Services Industry

Britain's tarnished financial services industry and banking sector seems intent on bringing about its own self destruction. Over the years there has been a litany of scandals eg:

- endowment mis-selling
- subprime mortgages
- PPI mis-selling
- LIBOR fraud
- NatWest computer meltdown
- Northern Rock, RBS etc etc to name but a few

However, it seems that the industry is determined to add to its list of self inflicted shame and dishonour. Step forward the usual suspects ie; Barclays (a familiar name), HSBC, Lloyds and RBS which have all admitted to mis-selling interest rate hedges to small and medium sized business customers.

Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland have all agreed to immediately halt the sale of complex interest rate hedges to smaller businesses and have pledged to compensate potentially thousands of customers who have been screwed by them.

According to the Telegraph the FSA is of the view that about 28,000 businesses had been sold interest rate hedges.

Another nail in the coffin of the tarnished reputation of the UK's financial services industry.

The financial services industry is now fully immersed in its own self created shit, and quite clearly is on the verge of implosion.

Read More

Snouts In The Trough - Bogus PPI Claims

The Financial Ombudsman has, according to the BBC, stated that nearly 6,000 people submitted bogus compensation claims for mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) on policies that they had never taken out.

The problem has been exacerbated by the activities of certain claims firms, who appear to be less than honest/ethical.

This rather proves the old saying "what goes around, comes around", as companies that unethically sold these useless policies are now on the receiving end of equally unethical treatment/practices.

Read More

"Free" Money - The Great PPI Giveaway

Courtesy of the greed and lack of ethics of our tainted financial services industry, there are billions of pounds to be "given away" by the recalcitrant banks and lending institutions that conned people into buying the now widely derided Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) policies.

Simon Gompertz has published the headline figures:

"The extraordinary scale of the PPI compensation grab:

£5bn compensation still to be paid out

12 million policies may have been mis-sold

800 claims management companies  trying to get a slice of the money

£2m a month being spent on advertising by these claims companies

They charge 25% or more in fees, plus VAT

Banks are making 50,000 compensation payments a week

That's around £400m a month being paid out

The payments average £2,750, some are £16,000 or more

Some say this massive cash payout could give a boost to the economy

How to claim compensation? Contact your bank, or the Financial Ombudsman Service"

Given that the banks showed no ethics in selling these now widely derided products onto their naive customers, there is no shame in asking for them to pay the money back (but don't waste money on using a claims company).

Read More

1954: Prices and Fed Policy

Prices were incredibly subdued in 1954.  Consider the following charts:

The year over year percentage change in PPI was mild for the first half of the year and negative for the second -- albeit very slightly negative.

The year over year percentage change in CPI showed the exact same pattern as PPI.

Also consider these price charts from the 1954 Federal Reserve policy review:

Remember that in early 1951, Congress passed a price control act as a way to prevent price spikes during a time of war.  Also remember that there were wage and price panels that monitored and set prices for a bit of time after the passage of that act.

However, as prices were contained, interest rates dropped:

Read More

1952: Inflation and Fed Policy

This posting is part of the Bonddad Economic History Project 

CPI was quite moderate.  The YOY percentage change started at 4% and slowly decreased throughout the year to a little under 1%.  Now, this type of deceleration can also be a sign of a potential recession on the horizon, which did start in the 3Q of 1953.

The YOY percentage change in PPI was negative for the entire year, indicating the input prices were dropping.

The above charts shows the absolute PPI level for the year, which shows the drop more completely.

As a result of the stable inflation picture, we see that the Fed did not raise rates in 1952. We also see that interest rates were fairly steady, with the exception of the continued upward movement of Treasury Bills, which jumped higher at the end of the year.  The Fed explained the increased as an increased demand for loans at the end of the year.

The above table shows the increase in various types of loans over the year.  Note the slow pace at the beginning of the year, while we see a big bump in the 4th quarter.  We see two reasons for the increase.  Business loans increased, with almost all of the increase coming in the fourth quarter.  In addition, "other loans to individuals" increased by $2.2 billion , but this increase came from a strong growth in the second, third and fourth quarters (for more on the increase in consumer credit, see the 1952; PCE post).

The above tables shows that corporate security issues rose strongly in 1952, and competed for commercially available capital.  The increase in 4th quarter lending was probably partially caused by an inability to complete an offering prior the end of the year.  Again, note the large increase in consumer credit.

In short, what we see here is a fairly stable financial system. 

Read More

1951; Prices and Fed Policy

This is part of the Bonddad Economic History Project

Remember that the early 1950s saw tremendous growth in consumer demand and employment growth (see here and here).  Hence there is s tremendous amount of demand pull inflation in the economy.  In addition, the US is now producing for a massive war effort, which greatly increases the demand of basically every raw material.  As such, inflation increases.  Yet, in 1951 we see a decrease in inflation, which leads to the question, why?

Price controls.  In 1951, Congress passed the General Ceiling Price Regulation of 1951, which froze prices at their highest level reached in late December 1950 and late January 1951. 

Also of extreme importance this year was the Treasury Fed-Accord of 1951, which was:

Agreement between the U.S. Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors that enabled the Fed to pursue an active Monetary Policy, independent of the Treasury and the federal government. Before 1951, the Fed had to assure low cost Treasury financing by purchasing Treasury securities at a set price. Afterward, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee was able to purchase as much, or as little, of Treasury securities offered for sale by the Treasury Department as it wanted, instead of having to buy whatever the Treasury issued at the prevailing rate. Also known as the Treasury-Fed Accord.

You can read a more complete history at the Richmond Fed.

In short, the Fed no longer had to buy bonds at set prices; as such lenders could no longer count on
the Fed to purchase bonds whenever they (the lenders) needed to extend credit.  As such,

While the Fed did not raise the discount rate, they did increase the reserve requirements for banks, and the margin account requirements for stock purchasers.  They also tightened installment credit terms and real estate lending.  In addition, there was also a voluntary restraint on "non-essential lending, related to war activity.

The charts below, from the Federal Reserve report, show the changes in overall credit for year.

Business loans still grew at a strong rate, largely thanks to loans for essential war activity.  The constraints on consumer lending show clearly on the chart (and below, which show a small .1% increase in consumer lending) as does the constraints on mortgage credit.

The above chart shows the overall upward drift of interest rates in the government security areas, which was primarily caused by the new arrangement between the Fed and the Treasury department.

Finally, consider the following charts of inflation from the 1952 Economic Report to the President.

Read More

Barclays To Settle All PPI Claims

Barclays has confirmed that all PPI customers who made a complaint before April 20 will be reimbursed the total value of all their premiums, plus 8% interest.

This is a hefty kick in the teeth to the "financial ambulance chasing" claims firms, who offer to help PPI victims reclaim their premiums (this is in fact a simple and free task) in exchange for a hefty percentage of the reimbursement secured.

Needless to say these "financial ambulance chasers" will doubtless find another mis-selling trough to stick their snouts into, as the UK's financial services industry is bereft of scruples and the UK public bereft of financial commonsense.

Read More

Banks Cave In Over PPI - Or Do They?

The British Bankers' Association (BBA) has stated that banks will drop their legal challenge to paying compensation for mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance (PPI).

The volte face is a result of Lloyds giving up the fight last week, and announcing that it would set aside a £3.2BN compensation fund, closely followed by Barclays announcing that it has thrown in the towel.

However, before those with "£ signs" in their eyes start popping the champagne corks in anticipation of receiving a payout, customers of the banks should consider this. Banks will simply fund these claims by putting up charges on loans/credit cards and, most likely, will introduce charges for current accounts.

One way or another, it will not be the banks that end up paying the compensation.

Read More

Ripping Off The Over Fifties

The Times reports that building societies are ripping off the over fifties wrt interest rates offered on ISA accounts.

As from yesterday anyone over 50 will be able to invest an extra £1,500 into their cash Isas, as their allowance will rise from £3,600 to £5,100.

However, "institutions have launched a wealth of accounts to attract older savers' cash — but some are offering poorer rates than their 'mainstream' deals".

Fair comment.

However, as we know, the financial services industry does not discriminate when it comes to ripping people off. The British consumer has been, and continues to be, ripped off by the financial services industry viz:

- bank charges
- PPI
- endowment mortgages
- interest rates
- mortgage charges etc etc

In the eyes of the financial services industry we are all "prostrate cows" ready for slaughter.

Read More

The Banking Rip Off

As I have noted before, the financial services industry in the UK has an unfailing knack for digging itself deeper into its own shit.

Not content with foisting endowment mortgages, PPI, excess credit card rates, bank charges and other insults on its hapless customers it now seeks to milk them further by "imaginative" and outrageous profiteering charges on mortgage arrears.

Many thousands of homebuyers, many of whom are unemployed, face profiteering penalty charges on top of their regular monthly mortgage repayments.

The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) report that the number of mortgages in arrears by three months or more has reached 270,400 (compared with 152,700 at the end of the second quarter of 2008).

Moneysupermarket.com report that Lloyds Group is charging £206 for repayments three months or more in arrears.

GMAC and Abbey charge penalties of £50 and £40, respectively, when the borrower is only one month in arrears.

Halifax charges £35 for every call/letter wrt mortgage arrears, and then has the barefaced cheek to charge £100 for debt advice.

The FSA has a Code of Conduct that requires that lenders treat customers fairly sympathetically.

Evidently the banks haven't read that code, or simply do not care about it.

The Treasury Select Committee is not impressed with either the banks, or the hapless and hopeless FSA. It has attacked the FSA for sitting on its hands.

Britain's financial services industry is rotten to its core.

Until the FSA is expunged from history, and replaced with a more pro active assertive regulatory body, the hapless British consumer can only expect more of the same and continue to be ripped off.

Those who currently are enjoying the fruits of their profiteering should bear in mind the wise adage:

"What goes around, comes around".

Read More

Dead Man Walking

The Tories have promised to abolish the hapless and hopeless Financial Services Authority (FSA) when, as seems likely, they win the next election.

The FSA was set up by Gordon Brown in 1997, as part of his much derided and failed tripartite regulatory scheme. It has had many "triumphs" since inception, eg:

- standing up for the life assurance industry against the hapless consumers who were conned into buying worthless endowment mortgages

- allowing the board of Northern Rock to destroy the company

- allowing RBS to come to edge of ruin

- allowing banks and credit card companies to charge extortionate rates of interest

- allowing banks, credit card companies and loan companies to sell ineffective and over priced PPI

- standing by as the banks operated the world's largest Ponzi scheme (bundling and selling worthless debt in a frenzy of greed)

- allowing the banks and mortgage companies to push Britain into an unsupportable level of consumer debt

More generally asleep at the wheel, and lacking any real pro active energy, the FSA will not be missed by the consumer; but may well be by its paymasters in the financial services industry (whom the FSA stood up for on numerous occasions).

Responsibility for regulation of the financial markets will be given to the Bank of England, and a new consumer protection agency will be created with the necessary "clout" to make sure the public were treated fairly.

Not before time!

Read More

The Role of The FSA

The Financial Services Consumer Panel (FSCP) has given the Financial Services Authority (FSA) a public spanking for the "unrealistic" emphasis on consumer responsibility outlined in the FSA's consultation paper on consumer responsibility.

The emphasis on consumer responsibility, already ingrained in the FSA's philosophy, is being used by Britain's "rip off" financial services industry as an excuse for avoiding their responsibilities to consumers.

The FSCP said that the consultation paper risked shifting the focus on consumer protection away from regulated firms.

The FSA has been more than happy in the past to blame the consumer for financial product failings (eg endowment policies).

Doubtless blaming the consumer makes the FSA's job easier, not least because it is funded by the financial services industry. However, it should remember that its role is to protect the consumer from the unscrupulous financial services industry who seek to sell on products that are over complex and shoddy (eg PPI, endowment policies etc).

Read More

Laughing at Laffer

About the inflation scare, here's the YOY chart of PPI and CPI




Now -- on a month over month basis, we're getting some stabilization.

Read More

Banks Mislead Customers

As I have noted before on this site, Britain's financial services industry has treated (and continues to treat) its customers with absolute contempt.

The reputation of the financial services industry continues to plummet; endowment mi-selling, PPI, excess bank and credit chargres, high risk lending to the vulnerable, excess bonuses etc have all been nails in the coffin of its reputation.

Founded on the twin pillars of greed and arrogance the financial services industry, despite almost being destroyed by the current self inflicted recession, continues to fleece its hapless customers.

An inquiry by the Banking Code Standards Board (BCSB) noted that over 50% of bank and building society staff were feeding customers misleading information about when funds would be available for withdrawal, and when interest would start to be earned on cheques.

In other words, customers are being lied to.

When will the financial services industry be held accountable for its appalling behaviour and treatment of its customers?

Never, as long as the FSA has anything to do with it!

Read More

The PPI Rip Off

The financial services industry doesn't seem to yet get the point that its reputation is in tatters; not just because of the recession brought about by the greed and stupidity of the banks, but because of a number of issues over the years that impugn its integrity and honesty eg endowment misselling, payment protection insurance (PPI), bank charges, debt collection, credit agreements etc.

Not content with having already severely tarnished its reputation wrt PPI, the insurance industry is seeking to further gouge its own self inflicted wounds by increasing the cost of PPI policies and reducing the actual cover provided.

The Times reports that millions are facing a 50% rise in the cost of PPI cover. Indeed the cost of some PPI policies has already increased by 170% over the last year. The Post Office has written to its PPI customers warning them that it plans to cut the maximum payment in the event of redundancy, and double the cost of some premiums.

Those who clamour for greater regulation of the financial services industry should remain calm, the addiction of those in the industry to destroying their own reputations will ensure that there will be very little remaining of the UK's financial services industry to regulate in ten years time.

By then people will have finally woken up to the fact that they have been ripped off on a continual basis, and will simply resort to putting their money under their mattresses as their grandparents used to do.

The financial services industry will be the author of its own downfall.

Read More

Egg Fined by FSA

Egg, the Internet bank, has been fined £721K by the FSA for serious failings in the way it sold payment protection insurance (PPI) to its credit card customers. The FSA has also ordered it to pay compensation, which could cost £10M.

The FSA found that Egg had instructed sales staff to use hard-sell techniques on those who proved reluctant buyers.

These included over-emphasising the benefits of the cover, or telling customers they could take it out for free for a limited period and then cancel. The Guardian notes that Egg, in some cases, applied the cover to a customer's credit card even when they had not agreed to buy it.

Is it any wonder people despise the banks?

PPI misselling ranks with the misselling of endowment mortgages and personal pensions as one of the major financial scandals of the last 20 years. The bottom line being that PPI is overpriced and in many cases when a claim is made useless, as the insurers do their best to wriggle out of their obligations.

The FSA said telephone sales by Egg staff of PPI failed in its standard tests in 40% of cases between January 2005 and December 2007. Egg sold more than 106,000 PPI policies at an average cost of £156 during that period.

Egg will now write to customers who bought the cover, offering them the chance to cancel their policy and get a full refund. The FSA said that if everyone claims a refund, the bank would face a charge of over £10M.

Read More

The PPI Rip Off

The Competition Commission is finally looking to get its teeth into the con trick of payment protection insurance (PPI), as it issued a statement yesterday calling for a ban on sales of the policies when people take out loans and credit cards.

The Commission wants banks to wait for 14 days before approaching borrowers to sell PPI, and wants to ban financial providers increasing interest paid by charging for the entire cost of a policy at the start of a loan.

Martin Lewis, the personal finance campaigner, estimates that half of the policies in force may have been mis-sold (estimated to be worth £10BN).

Needless to say the Association of British Insurers isn't best pleased, and claimed that the Commission would "kill the PPI market".

So what?

The policies rarely pay out (the Competition Commission said only 14% of premiums are returned to policyholders, compared with 54% for home insurance and 78% for car insurance) so what is the point of them?

Read More

London's Reputation Tarnished

London's reputation as the world's leading financial centre was further tarnished yesterday when the London Stock Exchange suffered its worst systems failure in eight years, forcing it to suspend trading for seven hours.

To add to the woes of those trying to trade yesterday the crash happened on what would have been one of the busiest days of the year, hot on the heels of the news over the weekend that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had been bailed out.

A cynic might argue that the system was deliberately shut down, so as to avoid a massive spike in bank shares occurring.

Reuters quoted one trader as saying:

"We have the biggest takeover in the history of the known world ... and then we can't trade. It's terrible."

Another said:

"This halt today clearly has once again damaged (the LSE's) reputation as a leading exchange, especially on a day like today, highlighting that it may have been unable to handle the volumes this morning."

The LSE have not given an explanation for the crash, traders though are demanding an explanation.

LSE Chief Executive Clara Furse wrote to the FT on Monday, somewhat ironically, and said that the system used by the LSE was "the cutting edge".

This is just one of a string of issues that has tarnished the City's reputation. Other include; the endowment scandal, fat cat bonuses for failed executives, Northern Rock, excess bank and credit card charges, the mortgage drought, mis-selling of mortgages, PPI mis-selling etc.

The great and the good of the City should bear in mind that reputations are hard to earn, but easy to lose.

Read More

The Great PPI Rip Off

Those of you who have been screwed by your bank or other financial organ into taking out an unnecessary and expensive payment protection insurance (PPI) policy should read this article in The Times, which shows that you can claim back up to £24K.

Quote:

"The insurance, which is bought by one in four people and is supposed to cover your mortgage or loan repayments if you are unable to work, is described as one of the last big rip-offs in the industry after endowment mis-selling and overdraft charges.

Banks often add the cover to your loan automatically, with many borrowers never realising they have it. Even when they do, most consumers are unaware of the extent of overcharging.

Mortgage cover from Halifax, for example, would add £103 a month to the cost of a typical £200,000 home loan, or £2,472 over two years. The cheapest cover on the market can cost two-thirds less."

However, as I have noted before, banks are not charities. The money that they repay to customers in the form of compensation will be made up for elsewhere, via increased rates on loans and mortgages.

They simply do not care about their reputations, or their customers.

Read More

PPI Slammed

The Competition Commission has slammed the £5.4BN payment protection insurance (PPI) industry in a report issued this morning.

The Competition Commission states that consumers are paying more than £1.4BN a year too much for PPI; it also noted that banks, mortgage and credit card providers made it difficult for customers to compare PPI policies or switch to change their insurance.

Up to 7.5 million policies are taken out every year, with about 14 million policies active at any one time.

Peter Davis, deputy chairman of the commission, is quoted in The Times:

"We've found serious problems with the PPI market and customers are paying for the lack of competition. The way PPI is sold as an add-on to a loan or other credit product means that distributors escape the pressure they should face from competing suppliers".

Mr Davis has recommended a ban on selling PPI at the same time as a loan, or even within a fixed time after the loan, is taken out.

This is yet another nail in the coffin of the reputation of Britain's beleaguered financial services industry.

Read More