Regulator refuses to detail overcharging by banks

The State's financial watchdog has refused to provide details of overcharging by individual banks even though its own consumer…

The State's financial watchdog has refused to provide details of overcharging by individual banks even though its own consumer panel requested the information.

The Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority has also refused a request to oblige banks to show gross interest with Dirt tax separately deducted on statements.

While the regulator's consumer panel says it is "virtually incredible" that this issue is not addressed immediately, the regulator says the matter is closed until its Consumer Protection Code is reviewed next year.

The Financial Regulator also declined requests to report more frequently on the sanctions it imposes on financial services companies and to draw up a code of practice to deal with shortfalls on endowment mortgages.

READ MORE

In a review of the regulator's performance, the panel accuses it of slowness and excessive caution. "It communicates with such caution that it gives the impression that if it can find a reason not to act, this will be the preferred outcome. It appears to seek complexity and obstacles rather than to see consumer-oriented solutions to current and emerging problems."

As well as criticising the regulator's "unsatisfactory" performance in a number of areas, the panel says consumers need to be more clearly informed about where complaints should be made. It says consumers, and the panel itself, receive no information about the enforcement of regulations.

However, the chairman of the panel, accountant Brendan Burgess, said the performance of the regulator in dealing with some issues had improved since the review was completed earlier this year. "We hope they will continue to speed up."

The regulator had also started responding faster and more appropriately to questions from the panel. "And even if our suggestions are generally rejected, at least they are rejected more promptly," he added.

Overall, the regulator had got the balance right between protecting consumers and keeping the level of regulation appropriate, he said. The consumer was "far better off" than before the authority was set up.

The panel also expresses concern about the sums spent by the regulator on outside legal advice.