Special Official Note For Mortgage Brokers

HelpWhereIcan

homersimpson wrote:

if there is so much disagreement why can't/doesn't mse just write to financial services authority and ask for the 'official' line as what you should all exactly being doing? all they need to say we have a website which aims to help people save money, some of people who post on forum are brokers/financial advisors, what they should put in their signature in chat rooms? is that too simple? doesn't mse want fsa looking at site etc?

Probably because the FSA is something that we all have to deal with in our working lives and don't want creeping into our spare time. Which is why it is important that nothing we post in a signature etc could be deemed as advertising.

I am happy to state what I do, but I am not giving advice which is why my signature is worded as it is.

AndrewSmith

homersimpson wrote:

Is mse liable for things posted on site? Can they be sued? If so mse should do it to protect itself. Mse are cleary concerned or the following would not have been posted:

No as it is not advice given and endorsed by a member employed or acting on behalf of Martin Lewis or MSE. This is an open public forum and, as such, the poster is liable for the content of their own posts.

Think about it, if they were liable for the information posted any nutcase could say anything and Martin could be liable for it.

What Martin and MSE are concerned about is the vast differences in the content of signatures and their implications regarding contacting the poster etc. It is more to do with breaching the forum rules than anything else as MSE are not accountable for the content of posts on a public forum.

Joe_Bloggs

The FSA affects us all. Who influences the FSA ?
J_B.

AndrewSmith

homersimpson wrote:

What issues can it cause- all the replies so far is based on people's interpretation of what fsa would say which could or could not be right- get it straight from the horses mouth so to speak.

The issues MSE are referring to are breaches or interpreted breaches of the forum rules on self promotion or touting for business.

The discussions regarding FSA approval relate to the individual brokers / advisers and ensuring that they do not breach any FSA 'financial promotion' regulations by posting a signature containing certain content.

dunstonh

Who influences the FSA ?

Only one answer to that. The banks. Whatever the banks want, the FSA delivers.

AndrewSmith

dunstonh wrote:

Only one answer to that. The banks. Whatever the banks want, the FSA delivers.

Here here :T or Hear Hear?

MortgageMamma

I still think as brokers we should consider being proactive an approaching the FSA ourselves, either individually or group, expressing our concerns and asking for guidance. Compliance support from our chosen organisations is all very well, btu as you know the MCOB/FSA rules in some parts are very widely drawn and open to interpretation, and, if you interpret incorrectly there are consequences. It would be reassuring to have approached the FSA and have some form of specific guidance on this as after all, its what they get paid for

herbiesjp

OK so for the signature:

How about something short and sweet like mine, Andy's, MM's, HWIC (maybe a little shorter) or Payless?

No links to websites

Emails allowed, because I'm sure the other professionals use these boards for other purposes i.e freebies board etc etc. I cant see why an email would not be allowed

Otherwise you'll get other professionals simply not disclosing any status just to get around any rules that are set up?

Thaks for the input Kenshaz & JB- do any other posters have any ideas on this?

Joe_Bloggs

Who pays for what the FSA do ?
J_B.

HelpWhereIcan

MortgageMamma wrote:

I still think as brokers we should consider being proactive an approaching the FSA ourselves, either individually or group, expressing our concerns and asking for guidance. Compliance support from our chosen organisations is all very well, btu as you know the MCOB/FSA rules in some parts are very widely drawn and open to interpretation, and, if you interpret incorrectly there are consequences. It would be reassuring to have approached the FSA and have some form of specific guidance on this as after all, its what they get paid for

As Andrew, MM and others have said - the subject up for dicusssion is what disclosure ML and MSE want 'professionals' to make.

If he were to approach the FSA and say (as the FSa would hear it) "I want to offer a facility on my site for advisers to talk to members of the public and receive advice", the FSA would probably see that as implicit acceptance by ML that the site strays into regulated advice , therefore they would want him and the site to be regulated (a la Moneysupermarket) and I am not sure that Martin would like that.

As advisers we have the responsibility to ensure that we do not advertise or offer what may be deemed regulated advice (hence the reason most of us give generic info and then state get advice). If we don't and we cause the FSa to become interested in the site, then we will do Martin a dis-service as well as opening up another part of our lives to FSA scrutiny.

Martin is therefore entirely correct in wanting to ensure that people are open about who they are, but do not offer 'advice' or tout for business by standardising the signature requirement, without it becoming a 'regulated promotion' (see my post earlier about the MCOB rules).

Let's protect MSE'ers, but let's not spoil an open forum by over formalising the requirements for some of us.