Twitter icon Email alerts icon Latest News RSS icon Magazine icon Stay connected:

View the article online at

Ex-Lloyds bosses defend PPI sales and shift blame to FSA

by Michelle Abrego on Jan 22, 2013 at 07:58

Ex-Lloyds bosses defend PPI sales and shift blame to FSA

Former Lloyds risk and retail bosses have defended the bank over its sales of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) blaming poor communication with the Financial Services Authority (FSA), misunderstandings, and arguing that in some cases the product met customers' needs.

Ex-Lloyds chief risk officer Carol Sergeant said the bank was under was ‘intense scrutiny’ by the FSA from 2005 to 2008 but the regulator did not raise specific issues about the sale of PPI during that time.

Lloyds was later referred to enforcement and has so far paid out £5.3 billion in PPI compensation.

Giving evidence to the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards sub-committee on mis-selling and cross-selling Sergeant said there was a misunderstanding of rules during the relevant period and there should have been better dialogue between Lloyds and the FSA over what the rules actually meant.

‘It was a continuous period of improvement—with the benefit of hindsight—we should have had more deep conversations with the FSA about how they would implement the principles in practice,’ she said.

According to former principal of retail distribution and chief financial officer for Lloyds Banking Group, Helen Weir, there was confusion over how much of the advice had to be evidenced.

The panel’s lawyer, QC Rory Phillips asked why, with all the FSA scrutiny and external audits Lloyds continued to sell PPI if it was not for the purpose of profitability.

The total PPI income, net of claims, for 2002 to 2006 was £3.3 billion, said Phillips.

Weir said: ‘It is very important point we want to make, we believed it’s a good product that met customer needs. I still believe it meets some consumer’s needs.’

Weir admitted that the bank did mis-sell PPI but a lot of it came down to misunderstanding.

Sign in / register to view full article on one page

1 comment so far. Why not have your say?

Anonymous 1 needed this 'off the record'

Jan 22, 2013 at 09:23

Isn't it funny how grammar changes everything? The penultimate paragraph implies that PPI meets just the one customer's needs. Sounds about right, then! Seriously, though, one imagines that the "misunderstanding" came about by reference to the thirst for more profit. Cynical? Yes.

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Sponsored Video: Bringing it all back home

As the UK coalition government strives to rebalance the national economy, so called 'reshoring' looks set to play an increasingly important role in economic recovery.

Today's top headlines

Investing for income in a changing environment

With talk on interest rates on the horizon, our latest roundtable debate covers income investing against a changing backdrop

More about this:

Look up the shares

  • Lloyds Banking Group PLC
    Register or Sign in to receive email alerts for items in your favourites whenever we write about them

More from us


On the road

Click here to find out more from the Audience Development team.

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet