Warning: I am going to attempt to explain changes to the way the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) is funded. I'm not sure why. Because they're important, I suppose.
First, the past: the FSCS used to split regulated firms into five ‘classes', each of which was divided into two streams, provider and intermediation. When a firm collapsed, triggering consumer claims for compensation, it would be the remaining firms in the relevant stream that would have to pay for them, up to a pre-determined annual threshold. Once the threshold was breached, the burden would pass to firms in the other stream within that class. To use Keydata as an extremely unpopular example, firms in the investment (that's the class) intermediation (sub-class) stream had to pay ...
To continue reading this article...
Join Professional Adviser for free
Signup and gain exclusive members-only insights
- Unlimited access to real-time news, industry insights and market intelligence
- Stay ahead of the curve with spotlights on emerging trends and technologies
- Receive breaking news stories straight to your inbox in the daily newsletters
- Make smart business decisions with the latest developments in regulation, investing retirement and protection
- Members-only access to the editor’s weekly Friday commentary
- Be the first to hear about our events and awards programmes
