Consumer credit

Who regulates consumer credit?

Before 1 April 2014:

  1. consumer credit activities (including entering into consumer credit agreements) were regulated by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT)

  2. law firms had the benefit of a group licence for consumer credit work, which was issued by the OFT to the SRA and therefore didn't need an individual licence to enter into consumer credit agreements with clients or engage in ancillary consumer credit activities

On 1 April 2014, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) took over regulation of consumer credit work and the SRA's group consumer credit licence disappeared, meaning law firms lost the benefit of the group licence for all consumer credit activities.

Since 1 April 2014, consumer credit activities fall within the Exempt Professional Firms (EPF) regime. You can therefore undertake certain regulated consumer credit activities under the EPF regime (ie without being authorised by the FCA), so long as:

  1. you register on the FCA’s EPF register, and

  2. those activities arise out of, or are complementary to, the provision of a particular professional service to a particular client

The SRA Financial Services (Scope) Rules

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Practice Compliance News

Data by any other name—Court of Appeal reverses Upper Tribunal’s ruling on the protection of ‘personal data’ (DSG v ICO)

Information Law analysis: In this case, the Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the appeal brought by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), holding that it is sufficient that data which has been subjected to unauthorised or unlawful processing by a third party still constitutes personal data from the perspective of the data controller, even if it is pseudonymised ‘in the hands of’ the data controller and therefore anonymised ‘in the hands of’ the attacker. Accordingly, the court held, the data controller is required to take ‘appropriate technical and organisational measures’ (ATOMs) to protect that personal data against such hackers, even where those third parties cannot themselves identify the individuals to whom the data relates. Even though this judgment is under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998), this decision is significant as it confirms, in terms equally applicable to the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (UK GDPR), that the scope of the security obligation is not diminished merely because stolen or exfiltrated data would be anonymised in the hands of the third party with unlawful access. This development expands and makes more pressing the obligation on controllers to assess and guard against a broader range of threats—including ransomware, data destruction, and bulk exfiltration, regardless of the attacker's capacity to re-identify data subjects. Written by Adelaide Lopez, senior associate at Wiggin LLP.

View Practice Compliance by content type :

Popular documents