View from City Road: Widening the scope, scrapping the detail
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Office of Fair Trading is trying to square the circle with its reviews of the Consumer Credit Act. By instinct, it would like to extend the legislation to small limited companies, remove some important exemptions for banks and generally make the law work more effectively.
But how do you get the Government to agree to what looks like more red tape at a time when ministers are enthusing about deregulation? This is especially difficult with consumer credit, since by general agreement the 20-year-old act - introduced when Edward Heath was prime minister - is one of the most tempting targets for the deregulators.
The options under review are basically three. The law could be left as it is, though this does not seem very sensible. Why should large accountancy partnerships be given the same protection as private individuals, yet one-man limited companies have none under the act?
Alternatively, the act could be extended to small limited companies, bringing them into line with the partnerships, unincorporated sole traders and others who benefit from the same protection as private borrowers.
Finally, the act could be pared down to its essentials by saying it should only protect private individuals from sharks, with no businesses of any kind covered.
Since this is already the favoured option of the deregulators, the OFT would be going against the grain if it recommended any other course. Yet the more the OFT works at it, the more it is finding reasons for improving the act rather than drastically cutting it back.
There is a way round this dilemma, though it might require substantial changes to the way the act works. Take the example of annual percentage rates of interest, which are now widely regarded as meaningless.
There is a requirement for lenders to supply written quotations on demand, yet just about the only people who ever ask to see them are local trading standards officers doing checks.
If instead of that the OFT demanded much more extensive disclosure of the costs of loans and how they are affected by interest rate changes and early repayment, the quotation rule could be abandoned.
The same philosophy could be applied more widely. The whole emphasis of the act should be changed to disclosure and setting and policing general standards of behaviour, with the OFT acting as the regulator.
The more detailed rules could go, and it might then be possible to justify a widening of the scope of the act. Anybody with a view can express it at public hearings organised by the OFT in London on 27-28 October and in Leeds on 2 November.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments