Keydata scandal causes 500% FSCS claims hike

A further consequence of the allocation of Keydata claims to the IFA sector is that it will distort the complaints/claim data suggesting there have been more claims linked to IFA's than is really the case. This will then result in a larger percentage of the cost ot FSCS being allocated to us as IFA's. It is all horribly wrong and unjust and we have to sit by and watch, unless you have supported the Judicial review. Do it know if you havent already. BTW i have nothing to do with Gareth fatchett or his organisation other than i have supported its action to help US as IFA's

It is interesting as to who is to bear the legal liability for Lifemark will it be Keydata ?

A client recently received correspondence from the FSA, describing Keydata as a firm who ...

'specialised in the design and distribution of structured products for retail investors. It managed and provided adminstration services in respect of a range of products, such as ISAs, which were sold through independent financial advisers...'

Does that sound like intermediation? Just how many IFAs design their own structured products?

The FSA are responsible for this hike and they should be fined accordingly.

Agreeing with Michael. FSA responsible not only fine them also make them pay out of their own personal assets. Just like we do.

I agree at the first comments. It is now time for IFAs to stand up and be counted. Simply taking this whole matter lying down says to the FSCS and all others that advisors can be rolled over like puppys.

Time for all to put their hand in their pockets and make the challenge! Me included.

Even if Gareth Fawchett and partners can contain the 'out of control' FSA's advance by winning a small foray, such is the FSA's determination to depress, compress and offer no redress to the IFA sector, would anyone be surprised if the Keydata framed statistics were left in as IFA complaints if the FSA lost.

Perhaps, a new FSA TV programme could be launched with its host Hector Sants ...Are you being framed?

Quite possibly as evidence like Keydata is appearing ever more frequently. And who will pay for the FSA costs in hosting the programme...? The IFAs, its members, of course, (always game for a laugh). This is however, despite fewer and fewer IFAs in numbers - whether its reduction through enforcements, qualifications (level, 4, 5, 6 or soon to introduced level 16 if the FSA still encounters any IFAs left in 2020), or red tape bureaucracy adding layer upon layer of time costs to bankrupt IFA or heap regulation costs indirectly on clients.

Some cynics may, upon conducting a fact finding exercise, gather and hypothesize that the FSA's preferred outcome is:

IFA numbers (down) = Need for banks/ bancassurers to fill the void (up)

Those not cynical may have either left the IFA industry already or may be getting ready to charge clients £500 per hour, as the forces of demand and supply kick in. Either way, not a good outcome for the vast majority of UK consumers (except all but a few who an afford to pay £500 ph) but ‘job done’ as far as the FSA is concerned.

Thank God I retired six weeks ago. I used to love this industry and take a pride in helping clients with honesty and honour. What the banks are doing is the unacceptable face of capitalism in this country and the governments are letting them get away with it.

Dear Anon 4

I hope you got your money back. Unfortunately the FSCS is really showing itself up to be both disingenuous and pretty useless. They profess to have settled thousands of claims, but to the best of my knowledge have only paid out on a minuscule amount for those with Secure Income Bonds 1 and 4.

Those investors of whom I have knowledge have been jerked around by these jokers and shuttled between the various vulture liquidators and accountants when they have approached the FSCS. It is the FSCS responsibility and the buck should stop with them. Instead most get weasel words and legal gyrations. The money has been lost. The firm has been put into default; the brochures all mention the FSCS in the event of catastrophe. We have catastrophe – what are they waiting for? That claimants die waiting? This is not an Equitable Life situation – it is far worse. With Equitable it was the better off who thought they were smart cutting out the middleman and ignoring warning signs over years. Key Data took the money of small savers looking for a decent income, promised them low risk and then ripped them off with hidden charges and grotesque commissions and then absconded with the balance. It may not have been Key Data directly, but it was under their brand and it facile to blame others to who they entrusted the funds and should have been more fastidious in safeguarding them.

As I have said before this puts pass the parcel at an Afghan birthday party to shame.

I am adviser and I am as, if not more, disgusted than you are with the way the FSA and the FSCS have been handling this. Even when one does manage to ask a question or put a point to one of the big bananas (and believe me I have done so on any opportunity presented) all you get is a snow job so complete it makes Siberia look green.