Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

[Amethyst]

The Money Advice Service welcomes the Independent Review’s report on how to strengthen the Service. Crucially, the report recognises that consumers need support to make good financial decisions. It recognises the differing needs of consumers – including those millions of people who need help to overcome problem debt and many more who need help day to day to manage their financial affairs and understand how different products can help them.
The Review recognises that the Money Advice Service has two important functions: helping people who face problem debt get the help they need, and helping consumers understand financial services and make better decisions. The Service is committed to rising to the challenges posed by the Review, to ensure it is most effectively and efficiently meeting different consumer needs.

...........................

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

Government’s response to the independent review of the Money Advice Service

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...w_response.pdf

Debt advice Debt advice
2.2 The government believes it is important that individuals struggling with debts have access to free and impartial debt advice to help them get their finances back in order. Debt can affect people of all ages, backgrounds and a wide range of circumstances, and is often linked to a range of other problems in society, including family breakdown, homelessness and mental health issues. MAS plays a crucial role in funding and co-ordinating access to high quality free debt advice, to help consumers take the action needed to return to a sustainable financial situation.
2.3 MAS is now the largest single funder of free debt advice in the UK, and the Review notes the strong progress MAS has made since it took on its debt advice responsibilities in 2012. The Review rightly states that the challenge now is to ensure that more people can be helped in as effective and efficient a way as possible.
2.4 The government welcomes the Review’s recommendations – building on the findings of the 2013 NAO report1 – on how MAS can improve consumer awareness of free debt advice, and drive further and continued improvements in the quality, reach and cost-effectiveness of MAS-funded free debt advice.

2.13 The government believes it is important that the utilities industries contribute to the funding of MAS-coordinated debt advice in a way that is reflective of their relative significance to consumers’ indebtedness. Indeed, research carried out by MAS in 2014 found that utilities debts were cited as a concern by 40% of clients, up from 24% the previous year2. The Review marks the first step in the utilities industries’ support for increasing the provision of MAS-coordinated debt advice. The government looks forward to continued and increasing contributions from utilities in the years to come, and Ministers have written to the industries to this effect.

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

Review of the Money Advice Service

A
Recommendations
A.1 MAS should establish a high level Debt Advice Steering Group at the earliest opportunity, comprising senior representatives from creditors together with the Chief Executives of Citizens Advice, Step Change and the Money Advice Trust, to help improve the efficiency, effectiveness and reach of free debt advice. The Steering Group should be chaired by the MAS Chair.
A.2 MAS should use the Debt Advice Steering Group as a vehicle for brokering agreement on provision of a common front-end system across the main free debt advice providers, to triage consumers needing debt advice into the most appropriate channel.
A.3 MAS should work with the Debt Advice Steering Group to ensure that the funds available for debt advice, including financial services levy funds and voluntary contributions from energy and water sectors, are deployed in the most effective way.
A.4 MAS should work with creditors and debt advisors to broker agreement on the use of ‘nudge’ processes to refer consumers with problem debt to advice bodies at an early stage.
A.5 Government should in due course review the legal framework for debt administration - in order to provide consumers who agree to specified debt repayment schemes with a “breathing space” by freezing interest and charges, and to ensure a fair and appropriate basis for debt repayments to different classes of creditor.
A.6 MAS should work with the industry, the charitable sector and the media to raise consumer awareness of how to avoid problem debt and the options for advice, and the importance of seeking early help.
A.7 MAS should, when opportunities allow, seek to integrate its debt avoidance face-to-face, phone and web chat advice into its debt advice funding regime.
A.8 MAS should work with debt providers and creditors to promote the adoption of common protocols across the sector in order to raise standards and improve the efficiency of debt advice provision.
A.9 MAS should work to help raise standards in the wider debt advice market by undertaking mystery shopping and gathering other intelligence, engaging closely with firms, identifying good and poor practice and publishing its findings.
A.10 MAS should move to the recommended new website model and minimise spend on marketing activity.
A.11 FCA should make rules to require retail firms to promote MAS’s website and helpline.
A.12 MAS should identify gaps in provision and take steps to address them, including through grant funding.
A.13 MAS should first pilot and then establish a Financial Helpline and this should be promoted by retail financial services firms. MAS, FCA and FOS should coordinate to ensure effective triage and a ‘one stop shop’ for consumer queries on financial matters where possible.
A.14 MAS should work with industry sectors to simplify consumer information about products and help make product features more comparable. MAS should commit to a small number of such projects a year to sustain momentum.
68
A.15 MAS should drive quality, innovation and good practice in consumer information provision through a range of approaches that encourage information and guidance providers to adopt good practice.
A.16 MAS should establish consumer-oriented quality criteria and a panel of independent experts, list providers on its website, and explore the feasibility of awarding good providers with a MAS Quality Mark; the government should consider whether it is necessary to clarify MAS’s statutory powers in this area.
A.17 MAS should work with the industry, consumer media and others to facilitate and coordinate consumer education campaigns on key issues.
A.18 MAS should play a strong strategic coordination and support role in embedding financial education in schools, engaging with the Department for Education and devolved administrations as appropriate.
A.19 MAS should establish a research hub for sharing insights and publish an Annual Review of Financial Health.
A.20 MAS should draw problem issues linked to consumer behaviour and understanding to the FCA and other authorities’ attention where appropriate, and engage with them on the sorts of remedies likely to be most effective.
A.21 The FCA and MAS should coordinate more closely together to seek to make the financial information and advice, and debt advice markets work better for consumers.
A.22 MAS and the FSCP should review how to build a stronger connection in order to support their respective responsibilities.
A.23 The FOS and MAS should build a closer partnership in order to share intelligence and insight.
A.24 The government and the FCA should consider what short-term measures they can take to strengthen the accountability of MAS.
A.25 The MAS Board should be strengthened at the earliest opportunity in order to align it more closely with the new business model.

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

''5.54 MAS should also work behind the scenes to identify websites and information providers which in its view, risk confusing consumers or compounding consumer misunderstanding. MAS should offer support to such organisations to help promote improvement. Where MAS is unable to persuade them to modify their approach it should draw attention to areas of poor practice.''

could be fun.

Promoting good quality advice and information
5.44 As discussed in earlier chapters, people glean information and help on financial services from a wide range of sources and the market is developing rapidly. There is some excellent information and help available; conversely there are more dubious sources ranging from sites
1 ‘Guidance Consultation - Retail Investment Advice’, Financial Conduct Authority, July 2014
50
that don’t adequately disclose conflicts to out-and-out scams. A further issue is that many commercial providers may provide good advice, but there may sometimes be an overt or implicit link to a sales process.
5.45 MAS’s approach to-date has been largely to direct people to its own website – over which it has complete control and which it can be confident is independent. We discuss above why we believe this model to no longer be appropriate.
5.46 However, there is an important role to be played. Generic information and advice lie outside the scope of FCA regulation and no independent validation of sources and providers is available to help guide consumers to better providers, nor is there any incentive for providers to raise standards. Given the importance and breadth of this market, rather than attempt to fulfil all needs through its own site, MAS would add significant value by acting as the ‘guardian’ of quality for the whole range of other providers. We believe MAS should fulfil this role by identifying good quality provision and signposting consumers to it.
5.47 For a public body funded by levy to take on this role, its judgements will need to be fair and robust. MAS should therefore develop a considered view, based on its knowledge of consumer needs and consumer understanding, of what constitutes good quality consumer information and guidance. It should develop, and consult over, a clear set of consumer-oriented quality criteria – see the box below for an example of what these might cover. There are good precedents in developing such criteria, for example the FCA recently set standards for the pensions Guidance Guarantee, Ofgem has criteria by which it accredits energy switching websites under its Confidence Code, and Which? and its predecessor the Consumers Association have operated an accreditation model for consumer goods and services for many years. Box 5.C: Potential Money Advice consumer oriented quality criteria  clarity and simplicity  honesty and balance  availability and ease of use  openness about commercial model (where relevant)  comprehensiveness (where products are compared)  clarity on risks, benefits, costs and charges
5.48 MAS could apply the criteria to information and guidance offerings in the financial services market and list the providers which meet the criteria on its website. Providers could also be allowed to carry and promote a MAS Quality Mark.
5.49 In making its assessment of market offerings it is inevitable, even with a strong set of quality criteria, that MAS will need to exercise judgment in determining where to draw the line on who is a ‘good’ provider. We recommend that MAS establish an Expert Advisory Panel to assist with this process, and also undertake its own ‘mystery shopping’. MAS should develop mechanisms for appeal and ensure accreditations are kept up-to-date. In due course, MAS could establish a feedback facility via social media to enable consumers and others to input views.
51
5.50 The benefits of such an approach would be:
 it would facilitate industry agreement and understanding of what represents good practice in consumer information and guidance provision
 it would fit more closely with consumers’ actual behaviour, improving the quality of the sites they naturally go to – some of which are highly innovative - rather than trying to direct them to the MAS site
 providers would be encouraged to improve their content in order to receive a ‘Quality Mark’
 the Mark would help consumers quickly identify trustworthy information about financial products
5.51 We believe that MAS would be able to introduce such a model under its existing remit and new legal powers are not required. However, this is a significant new role for MAS and the government may want to consider introducing clearer statutory powers. It has been suggested that this could amount to quasi-regulation but our view is that it doesn’t go that far – MAS has no supervisory or enforcement powers and application for listing and the Quality Mark would be optional.
5.52 In order to encourage the take-up of any accreditation scheme, MAS would need to promote it widely, working with consumer bodies, financial services providers and the media.
5.53 In time MAS could consider outsourcing assessment of providers in order to focus on more strategic coordination; this would be subject to considerations of potential conflicts of interest.
5.54 MAS should also work behind the scenes to identify websites and information providers which in its view, risk confusing consumers or compounding consumer misunderstanding. MAS should offer support to such organisations to help promote improvement. Where MAS is unable to persuade them to modify their approach it should draw attention to areas of poor practice.
Recommendation: MAS should drive quality, innovation and good practice in consumer information provision through a range of approaches that encourage information and guidance providers to adopt good practice.
Recommendation: MAS should establish consumer-oriented quality criteria and a panel of independent experts, list providers on its website, and explore the feasibility of awarding good providers with a MAS Quality Mark; the government should consider whether it is necessary to clarify MAS’s statutory powers in this area.

[EXC]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

5.54 MAS should also work behind the scenes to identify websites and information providers which in its view, risk confusing consumers or compounding consumer misunderstanding. MAS should offer support to such organisations to help promote improvement. Where MAS is unable to persuade them to modify their approach it should draw attention to areas of poor practice.
Recommendation: MAS should drive quality, innovation and good practice in consumer information provision through a range of approaches that encourage information and guidance providers to adopt good practice.
Recommendation: MAS should establish consumer-oriented quality criteria and a panel of independent experts, list providers on its website, and explore the feasibility of awarding good providers with a MAS Quality Mark; the government should consider whether it is necessary to clarify MAS’s statutory powers in this area.

They seem to want MAS to extend its remit to become a financial services advice regulator.

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

MArtin Lewis is almost as trusted as CAB - not sure whether he should be flattered or not by that.

How come Martin is separate from MSE in most bits?


And I have no idea who Alvin Hall is ?

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

Alvin Hall ? according the the report as many people would consider using Alvin Hall as would consider using Stepchange .... who the heck were they asking ?

[Amethyst]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

They seem to want MAS to extend its remit to become a financial services advice regulator.

I don't think that would be a bad idea.

[EXC]

Re: Money Advice Service’s response to the Independent Review of the Service.

MArtin Lewis is almost as trusted as CAB - not sure whether he should be flattered or not by that.

How come Martin is separate from MSE in most bits?

ML will appeal to a broader market than those who use CAB. I think the distinction between him & MSE is that a lot of people who listen to him on the radio & TV won't necessarily visit MSE. Alvin Hall? Never heard of him either.