Consumer Credit Bill

Clause 45 is designed to enable the OFT to require the same information from existing licence holders as they can from those making an application for a new licence. That ensures that the OFT monitors the fitness of licensees on the basis of up-to-date information. The OFT must be able to require the same information from existing licence-holders as it can from all new applicants. So if the information that the OFT requires from applicants changes, all existing licence-holders must supply that new information to the OFT. The information and documents must be provided in the time specified by OFT in a general notice. The second part of this clause deals with changes in the information and documents that licence-holders have previously submitted with an application. It is related to changes to the basic documents that they have provided. If the information or documents have been superseded or have changed, the licence-holder must notify the OFT. Additionally, if the licensee becomes aware of any errors in the information or documents submitted, he must inform the OFT. However, we do not want licensees to have to notify the OFT of every comma in the wrong place. That would be absurd and time-consuming for the licensee and a waste of resources for the OFT. So a licensee is not required to notify the OFT of any clerical errors or omissions that do not affect the substance of the document. The licence-holder also does not need to inform the OFT of anything that they are already required to notify under Section 36 of the Act. It is important that the information is kept up to date since the OFT has an ongoing duty to monitor fitness, and that monitoring needs to based on current, up-to-date information. The amendment is concerned with the second part of Clause 45, and it would widen the scope of the changes that it would be necessary to notify to the OFT. The way the amendment works is that it says that there are two exceptions to proposed new subsection (5)—if the change is significant it must be notified, and if it falls within a description of matters specified by the OFT in a general notice. Because it is either/or, the amendment would widen the scope of the changes that it would be necessary to notify to the OFT. As the Bill stands, changes need to be notified only if they are about a matter specified in a general notice. That is to ensure that businesses need to tell the OFT only about relevant changes in circumstances relating to their consumer credit business licence. They would not need to notify any changes in circumstances, however significant, if they did not relate to matters concerning fitness, which are specified in a general notice. However, those changes would also need to be notified under the amendment, which would widen the scope of the clause unnecessarily, leading to increased bureaucracy for both businesses and the OFT. I therefore ask the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.