JEFF PRESTRIDGE: Regulators fall asleep when Neil Woodford’s predicament returns home

JEFF PRESTRIDGE: The Financial Conduct Authority falls asleep when Neil Woodford’s predicament hits the house

Much has been written about the fall from the grace of investment giant Neil Woodford, but the financial distress he has caused to thousands of investors is mostly to awaken regulators from their sleep. I’m not doing anything.

The Financial Conduct Authority, like a dormant dormouse, unaware of the need to take immediate action against those who played a major role in the demise of the multi-billion pound investment fund Woodford Equity Income and asset manager Woodford Investment Management. It seems to be sleeping. So far, 16 months have passed since equity income was suspended, and no regulator was liable.

It’s not a megalomaniac investment in Woodford. Don’t fund Supervisorlink (almost as useless as FCA in protecting investor interests); someone who advertised Woodford as if there was an investment halo 6 inches overhead (Hargreaves) Lands down) is not.

Sleeping at work: 16 months have passed since Neil Woodford’s equity income was suspended

The situation is unacceptable, especially if set against the fact that regulators have given staff bonuses in excess of £ 125m since 2016.

What to do? Are you part of an organization that does little to protect investors from financial scandals such as Woodford and the failed Minibond issuer London Capital & Finance? Talk about self-serving. Reward for failure.

It’s no wonder that regulatory boss Nikil Rathi promised to dispose of them after admitting that they were “not effective in promoting individual or collective performance.” Too right. It’s no wonder that the regulatory chairs since April 2018 resigned a year earlier.

The wounds caused by Woodford’s blunder caused investors were highlighted a few days ago by a study conducted by the Association of Investment Companies (AIC). Little is known about the finding that 86% of Woodford’s investors are suffering financially as a result of the suspension of equity income. Much more impressive are the findings on investor general well-being and confidence in the investment industry.

Approximately 53% of door-to-door canvassing said they were emotionally affected by the changing events in Woodford, and 77% said their confidence in investment managers declined.

Everything is pretty worrisome. But of course, regulators ignore the findings and negate AIC’s wise demands on stricter rules regarding the types of assets that funds set in the same way that Woodford Equity Income can invest.

Regulatory hibernation is in the order of day and night.

Is the increase in contactless payments really good?

Even if you don’t enter your PIN, I’m not sure if it’s good that the contactless payment limit was raised to £ 100 on Friday.

Before the PIN is required, it will be confiscated by a scammer who will be able to spend a cumulative total of up to £ 300 on the stolen card.

For the time being, we will ask banks and credit card providers to maintain a contactless payment limit of £ 45. Most banks and card issuers have already shown that they can set their own. Indeed, my bank forever asks for a PIN when buying wake-up black filter coffee for £ 1.25 at Pret A Manger on the way to work.

bothersome? Occasionally, I would like to deal with an organization that takes my financial security seriously and gives scammers access to my hard-earned money, rather than waiting.


JEFF PRESTRIDGE: Regulators fall asleep when Neil Woodford’s predicament returns home

Source link JEFF PRESTRIDGE: Regulators fall asleep when Neil Woodford’s predicament returns home

Back to top button