HC Deb 09 July 1997 vol 297 cc477-8W
Mr. Timms

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what progress has been made towards providing redress for the victims of misselling of personal pensions. [7904]

Mrs. Liddell

In my earlier reply to my hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Mr. Timms) on 24 June,Official Report, columns 454–55 I undertook to publish information each month about the cases handled by the 24 firms which have most cases to review. These are the firms for which the regulators (the Securities and Investments Board and the Personal Investment Authority) have published targets for completion of case reviews. Below is a table containing the information provided to me by these firms about progress with their casework to end June.

The figures in the table, which are those submitted by the 24 firms themselves, provide a benchmark from which future progress can be measured.

The volume of cases cleared is extremely disappointing. All the firms in the table have a great deal more work to do. Some appear hardly to have begun.

It is now imperative that all firms—not just these 24—which have sold personal pensions should make serious efforts to improve their performance in completing their caseloads. This is not only in the interests of their customers but also of their own reputations with the general public. The regulators will continue to monitor the firms' performance against the targets they have been set.

I will decide once I have seen some further figures to measure progress what further action may be called for.

A B C D E F
Hogg Robinson 602 50 8 2 1 0
Colonial 6,754 152 663 503 32 0
Gan 8,358 43 133 79 63 1
Sedgwick 6,731 359 436 262 64 1
Abbey Life 15,993 950 1,116 238 169 1
Allied Dunbar 16,422 1,177 761 281 182 1
Lincoln National 12,301 830 541 203 148 1
Windsor Life 7,830 0 164 157 131 2
London & Manchester 6,944 64 493 399 117 2
Cooperative Insurance 41,762 1,025 7,195 1,280 825 2
Equitable Life 10,761 4,097 3,788 437 307 3
Britannic 12,360 0 1,355 728 443 4
Sun Life of Canada 25,682 1,628 1,279 1,161 1,002 4
NatWest 13,192 2,657 1,801 1,059 573 4
United Assurance 12,648 382 1,521 783 585 5
Pearl 39,548 897 4,486 3,040 2,076 5
Prudential 58,606 35 13,829 12,861 3,128 5
Royal London 9,357 138 1,280 748 532 6
Legal & General 33,282 12,147 3,442 2,590 2,046 6
Norwich Union 6,772 1,824 1,009 548 428 6
Lloyds/TSB 46,562 4,662 6,836 5,166 3,310 7
Royal & Sun Alliance 14,995 927 1,933 1,605 1,213 8
Guardian 8,255 264 1,511 1,175 855 10
Barclays Life 16,700 5,134 4,413 3,121 2,315 14

A= Cases identified as requiring review, B = Of A, cases where investor was informed that information gained during assessment excluded cases for review.

C = Number of assessments completed.

D = Cases where redress has been offered.

E = Cases where redress has been accepted. This is a subset of assessments completed.

F = Cases where redress has been accepted as a percentage of cases identified for review.

Some further cases will have been completed without redress being due.