At a confab of big money managers, the hottest topic was the home loan market. Scared yet?
Continued here: Mortgages are investment du jour for hedge funds
Category : Business
If it’s fair to limit taxpayers’ expense for retirement money being set aside by “the rich,” it’s vastly more fair to limit taxpayers’ expense for Obama’s own package.
View post: The problem with Obama’s retirement plan
Category : Business, World News
Africa loses twice as much money through tax avoidance, secret mining deals and financial transfers as it gets from donors, ex-UN chief Kofi Annan warns.
Here is the original post: Secret deals ‘plundering Africa’
Category : Stocks, World News
Dr. Jon Paul Trevisani Frequently Combines Surgical Procedures in Custom-Designed Treatment Plans That Can Reduce Overall Recovery Time and Save Patients Money
Read this article: Orlando Plastic Surgeon Combines Multiple Techniques to Achieve a Fully Rejuvenated Look and Reduce Recovery Time
Plans to sell off the Co-operative Group’s insurance operations will mark a historic shift, while appetite for co-op insurance continues elsewhere
The Co-operative Group recently announced that it wants to sell off its general insurance operations. If it goes ahead, it will mean the end of almost a century and a half of co-operative insurance in Britain.
The original Co-operative Insurance Society (CIS) was set up in 1867 to provide fire insurance for the rapidly increasing number of retail societies within the co-operative movement. In 1912, it became part of what is now the Co-operative Group following a take-over by the co-operative wholesale societies.
Despite suffering a £662m loss, the group maintains that the general insurance sale is still part of its strategy, following the sale of its life insurance and fund management business. Barring last-minute regulatory issues, Royal London is set to acquire this side of the old CIS business for £219m.
But although Britain is turning its back on co-operative insurance, the rest of the world is not. The desire of co-operatives to be able to insure with one of their own — rather than through a commercial insurer — has allowed successful insurers to become established throughout the global co-operative movement. Indeed, the world’s largest co-operative, Zenkyoren, gets its massive £70bn annual turnover from servicing the needs of the country’s agricultural co-ops.
Zenkyoren was set up in 1951. Six years earlier, a similar process in Canada saw the creation of what has become the Co-operators insurance company, now operating throughout the country. It markets itself on its co-operative ethos and principles and has taken a particularly strong line on issues around sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Like Zenkyoren and most other co-operative insurers, however, it is not directly owned by individual members: it’s a ‘secondary co-op’. It is collectively owned by a consortium of forty-five Canadian co-ops, credit unions and other organisations who jointly appoint its board and share its financial success.
And the impulse which led to Zenkyoren and the Co-operators is still very much alive. In Malawi, for instance, credit unions and co-ops are working hard to create their own national co-operative insurance company. The country’s federation of savings and credit co-operatives, MUSCCO, which already offers basic loan protection insurance, is making common cause with agricultural and consumer co-ops to try to raise enough capital to license a new insurer.
But collectively, co-op insurers are feeling rather chipper at the moment: the market share of the total insurance business held by them has been climbing since the financial crash. According to the International Co-operative and Mutual Insurance Federation (ICMIF), the insurance market share held by co-ops and mutuals has climbed from 23.7% in 2007 to nearly 27% today.
ICMIF is unusual among the international sectorial co-operative federations in having opened its membership to mutual insurers as well as co-operatives. It’s CEO, Shaun Tarbuck, argues that this growth is a direct result of popular disenchantment with shareholder-owned financial businesses with their focus on short-term profit maximisation. “I think organisations that have a values-based strategy are much more appealing to the general public,” he says.
He accepts that, until recently, co-ops and mutual insurers were often coy about promoting their different governance structure, but he says this is now changing. “We’re definitely seeing a trend towards organisations marketing their values, whether this is based on their being member-owned, on sharing profits or on business sustainability,” he says.
This sort of positive endorsement is a welcome turnaround from the situation during the dark days of demutualisation. Britain was particularly badly hit as, one by one, major mutual insurers like Standard Life, Norwich Union and Friends Provident followed the well-trodden building society route and turned themselves from member-owned institutions into plcs. Because of the demutualisations, Britain has now the smallest co-op and mutual market insurance share of any major economy, at around 6%.
The largest remaining life and pensions mutual is Royal London, so at least the Co-operative Group’s former life business will remain in the broader co-op and mutual family. The sale of the general insurance is much less advanced and could conceivably still be cancelled as the group tries to rebuild its long-term strategy following the Lloyds bid withdrawal. But, in the event of a sale, it would sell re-badged insurance products under the Co-operative Insurance name.
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the Guardian Social Enterprise Network, click here.
Business ministers want to consolidate consumer rights and extend them to non-traditional internet or online purchases
Consumer rights covering products such as cars and white goods are to be extended to apps and music downloads in a consumer bill of rights to be unveiled in the Queen’s speech on Wednesday.
Jo Swinson, the consumer minister, said the government would update the law to make it “fit for the 21st century” by ensuring consumers can secure refunds or replacements if web-based products fail.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills estimates that the changes could save up to £4bn over 10 years by consolidating consumer rights in one place. These are currently split between eight pieces of legislation while powers giving trading standards officers the ability to investigate breaches of consumer law are spread across 60 pieces of legislation.
The changes will lead to:
• An updating of the law to give greater protection to consumers who download films, music and games – a £1bn industry. The bill will make clear that a consumer must receive a refund if an online game freezes or if a film stream is unwatchable even if the broadband connection is fine.
• New protections for consumers making it easier to apply for compensation for breaches of competition law and new powers for trading standards officers to seek court orders requiring compensation to be paid.
Swinson said: “Stronger consumer protection and clearer consumer rights will help create a fairer and stronger marketplace. We are fully aware that this area of law over the years has become unnecessarily complicated and too confusing, with many people not sure where to turn if they have a problem. We are hoping to bring in a number of changes to improve consumer confidence and make sure the law is fit for the 21st century.”
Richard Lloyd, executive director of the consumer rights organisation Which?, said: “A consumer bill of rights is a welcome step towards ensuring that we have consumer laws fit for the 21st century. This bill is about making it easier for people to understand their rights and giving consumers power to challenge bad practice. It should also mean that both consumers and regulators have the tools they need to challenge unscrupulous businesses that breach the law.
“There are many welcome proposals in this bill, including extending the power of collective redress in competition cases and reforming the law on unfair terms and conditions. We urge the government to go further and to extend civil remedy powers to allow private enforcement bodies, like Which?, to take action against rogue companies and force them to put things right for consumers.”
Standing order scammers have taken £1,300 from my account, but Nationwide has not been helpful
I recently logged in to my online Nationwide account, only to discover that two unknown standing orders had cleared more than £1,300 out of my current account, leaving me with just £21. As I had had nothing to do with them – they were both to estate agents I had never heard of – I printed the statement and rushed to my local Nationwide branch. There was no manager available but a cashier cancelled the two standing orders. I asked whether I had signed the forms indicating I had consented to them being set up, and she said I hadn’t.
My card was stopped, and I was put in a cubicle and told to ring Nationwide HQ to sort out the problem. No one offered any support.
After lengthy waits and several more questions, I was told that once it was proved that I had not set up the standing orders, I would be refunded. Someone would ring me on Friday or Monday. When I arrived home, I had a message from a woman who worked for the Carlisle branch. She wanted to know if I had set up a standing order to Alpha Lettings. She said the signature very clearly did not match mine, so she had declined it.
Since then it has emerged that someone – or a group of people – has tried to set up a string of standing orders on my account, all to estate agents around the country. A second trip to a bigger branch wasn’t much good, either, and promised call-backs have not materialised. It seems to me that Nationwide doesn’t know what it’s doing when it comes to identity fraud of this kind. Can you please help? CB, south-west London
It’s clear from your letter that the building society hasn’t exactly covered itself in glory when dealing with this problem. The staff seemed to have no idea how stressful it was to discover £1,300 had gone from your bank account, and you should have been treated more sympathetically.
Standing order fraud is, according to our research, relatively rare, but your case has highlighted how easy it is to commit. You later realised that one of your bank statements failed to arrive around Christmas and, armed with this, the culprit probably set up the standing orders, relying on staff not looking at the signature too closely.
We suspect that although estate agent names were used, the money ended up in an unrelated, non-business account. For some reason, these frauds often seem to lead to a Barclays account at a branch in east London.
Nationwide accepts it should have handled the matter better. “While we have measures in place to prevent standing order fraud, and the overwhelming majority of attempts are prevented, it is clear we have let CB down on this occasion. It is important to note any innocent victim of fraud will always be refunded,” says a spokesman.
The money taken from your account has been returned, with an additional £200 to make up for the poor service.
We welcome letters but cannot answer individually. Email us at consumer.champions@guardian.co.uk or write to Bachelor & Brignall, Money, the Guardian, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Please include a daytime phone number
The website advertised a shirt at £13 but raised the price to £17 when I went to buy it
I recently found a Nike Tech Golf Polo shirt on the Sports Direct website for £13. But as soon as I tried to buy it, it came up in the “my bag” area (basket) at £17. My complaint was ignored, but when I looked again, the price had been increased to £17. What’s the legal position? JC, by email
This is a question that is increasingly being asked, especially on the back of the boom in internet shopping, and a number of high-profile online price gaffes. Quite simply, retailers are under no obligation to sell you items that have been incorrectly priced, whether you are in a store, or looking online.
Most online retailers’ terms and conditions state that the contract is formed at the point of despatch, allowing them to check the transaction and correct any errors. So had Sports Direct charged you £13 for the shirt and sent it out, it could not then demand the extra £4 if it later realised its error. The same would be true if you bought it in store, and then left the shop with the item.
Equally, if you see a £399 computer advertised for £3.99, and you buy and pay for 10 computers, the retailer will not be required to go through with the sale, assuming it spots the mistake before it sends them out to you.
If it sent them to you, there would be no obligation on you to pay the difference if later asked.
We welcome letters but cannot answer individually. Email us at consumer.champions@guardian.co.uk or write to Bachelor & Brignall, Money, the Guardian, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Please include a daytime phone number
Many British Gas customers on a heavily promoted fixed-price deal would have done better on the standard tariff
Thousands of British Gas customers who signed up for one of its fixed-price tariffs two years ago have, in effect, been overpaying for their gas and electricity since then, it has been claimed. In some cases they have paid £800 more than if they had taken a rival deal.
In May 2011 British Gas contacted many of its long-standing customers to offer them a new tariff called Fixed Price March 2013. At the time, the company was just about to increase prices, but offered this deal on the basis that it was more expensive than standard prices, but there would be no hikes until it expired at the end of March.
It was marketed, in particular, to those coming off previous British Gas fixed-price tariffs as offering them peace of mind. But while thousands of other households coming off rival fixed tariffs will soon be paying more for their energy, those who signed up to this particular deal will see their prices fall after being moved on to British Gas’s standard tariff.
With the average household energy bill having risen to an estimated £1,350 a year, and against a backdrop of energy chief executives constantly warning that bills are only set to increase, experts often suggest that the best bet is a fixed-price tariff.
In recent years all the big energy firms have offered fixed-price and guaranteed-discount tariffs in a bid to keep hold of customers. While those on other British Gas fixed tariffs have done well in the past, those unlucky enough to have signed up to this deal have overpaid.
According to an analysis by the switching comparison site TheEnergyShop.com, they have typically paid £480 more than they would have done had they been on the most competitive fixed price tariff offered by rivals.
Those living in households that consume above-average amounts of power could easily have overpaid £800 or more over two years. Had they stayed on the company’s standard tariff they would have still paid less, even though it has seen two price rises in the past two years
Joe Malinowski, founder of TheEnergyShop.com says: “This tariff was sold to British Gas customers who were coming off previous fixed-price deals, but it was a just a terrible deal,” he says. “It was offered at an initial 30% price premium over standard prices but was only available direct from British Gas.
“If your energy company phones telling you it’s got a great new fixed-price deal, it should send alarm bells ringing. Go online and do a comparison, and you may find it’s not quite as good a deal as you were led to believe.”
A spokeswoman for British Gas says: “Fixed-price products are offered to customers to insure against price rises and to guarantee the price they will pay for their energy for a fixed period. Customers can make a choice about the product they decide to buy, and in many cases this will prove to be a better long-term option. But prices can go down, as well as
Category : Business
Birmingham City football club owner Carson Yeung fails in his final attempt to have a Hong Kong trial accusing him of money-laundering thrown out.
See the article here: Yeung loses bid to stop HK trial