HC Deb 17 June 1998 vol 314 cc208-9W
Mr. Timms

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of progress made by pension firms in providing redress to the victims of mis-sold personal pensions. [46554]

Mrs. Liddell

The table shows the progress made in the period to end May 1998 by the 41 firms whose figures I have been publishing. Some 78 per cent. of all the cases these firms must review have now been completed.

Many firms are now making good progress with their priority reviews. I expect the laggards to do their utmost to better the targets set for them by the regulators. I hope all firms will demonstrate the same commitment they have shown of late when they begin phase 2 of the review.

I am still disappointed by the poor progress being made by many IFAs. On 10 June, PIA fined Financial Options Ltd. and Investment Options Ltd. a total of £400,000 for various failings, mostly related to the review of personal pensions. I expect IFAs to deal with their priority cases as a matter of the utmost urgency and hope the industry will continue to pursue the ABI's lifeboat initiative to help IFAs finance their reviews and process cases. Mis-selling damages the reputation of the entire industry. It is in everyone's interests to work together to complete the review.

I am aware of criticisms by a number of IFAs of the FSA and PIA proposals for phase 2 of the review. Some even deny that there is a problem while others try to pass the buck. Their poor attitude tarnishes those IFAs with integrity who are making a concerted effort to complete their case reviews.

Progress by pensions firms in resolving cases of personal pensions mis-selling in the period to the end of May 1998
A B C D E F G H
Under 50% of cases resolved
DBS 1,889 298 259 76 183 134 7 27
Burns Anderson 1,178 308 227 128 99 82 7 44
Financial options 363 121 43 20 23 19 5 44
50–75% of cases resolved
Gan 11,598 1,368 5,434 632 4,802 3,836 33 50
Countrywide 4,857 2,239 268 166 103 79 2 51
Lincoln National 13,475 1,774 6,941 1,114 5,827 4,856 36 57
Windsor Life 9,558 3,332 3,064 291 2,386 1,896 20 58
Abbey Life 17,446 4,551 6,690 1,015 5,675 4,798 28 59
London and Manchester 8,430 1,271 4,540 537 4,003 3,603 43 64
IFA Network 333 97 120 84 36 33 10 64
Colonial 8,421 2,531 3,598 420 3,178 2,610 31 66
Friends Provident 6,964 1,049 3,948 601 3,347 2,984 43 67
Standard Life 7,052 780 4,284 999 3,285 2,932 42 67
Hill Samuel 6,114 862 3,678 653 3,025 2,663 44 68
Canada Life 5,575 340 3,937 588 3,349 2,893 52 69
Royal & Sun Alliance 16,109 3,028 9,953 1,158 8,795 7,100 44 70
NatWest 15,085 4,522 7,211 1,099 6,122 4,990 33 70
CIS 43,459 4,912 30,279 13,196 17,083 13,256 31 72
Sun Life of Canada 27,720 9,999 11,681 2,150 9,531 7,951 29 73
Berkeley Independent 173 104 22 18 4 4 2 73
Sedgwick 16,064 8,145 4,061 1,556 2,505 2,231 14 74
Over 75% of cases resolved
Albany Life 2,950 640 1,974 185 1,789 1,410 48 76
Allied Dunbar 19,197 4,050 12,176 3,507 8,669 7,251 38 77
M&E Network 315 173 78 26 52 48 15 78
Equitable Life 7,540 1,856 4,378 1,629 2,749 2,459 33 79
Guardian 9,161 1,260 6,569 974 5,595 5,017 55 79
Legal & General 36,804 14,872 18,372 1,743 16,629 13,440 37 82
Britannic 19,639 5,411 12,313 3,067 9,246 7,782 40 83
Wesleyan 4,178 267 3,378 987 2,391 2,264 54 84
Lloyd's TSB 50,018 12,382 32,508 6,281 26,227 23,855 48 85
Hogg Robinson 2,178 807 1,163 399 764 651 30 85
United Assurance 13,252 1,253 11,066 2,040 9,026 8,114 61 86
Commercial Union 7,887 1,299 5,849 799 5,050 4,708 60 86
Pearl 46,814 3,887 39,356 5,641 33,715 31,080 66 87
Prudential 72,172 19,410 52,681 3,875 48,806 40,239 56 88
Royal London 12,806 1,128 11,470 1,498 9,972 8,951 70 90
Barclays 17,035 6,050 10,293 2,306 7,987 7,146 42 91
Norwich Union 7,464 2,237 4,763 740 4,023 3,824 51 91
AXA Equity and Law 4,006 764 3,035 618 2,417 2,301 57 92
Godwins 1,478 114 1,354 455 899 839 57 95
Midland 4,862 553 4,196 493 3,703 3,622 74 96

Notes:

A: cases identified as requiring review

B: of A, cases where investor was informed that information gained during assessment excluded cases from review

C: number of assessments completed

D: cases where the investor has been informed that no redress is due

E: cases where redress has been offered

F: cases where redress has been accepted

G: cases where redress has been accepted as a percentage of cases for review ((F/A) x 100)

H: cases completed, including exclusions, as a percentage of cases identified for review (((B+D+F)/A) x 100)