In relation to Amendment No. 53, I was describing to the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, the implications of the change that he proposes—for example, those regulated by the FSA to be exempted under Clause 4(1). It was already our intention to exempt them under Clause 4(2), but I accept that it might be better to exempt all of those already regulated in one place. I should clarify that where legal expenses insurers offer claims management services, they would be regulated by the FSA only in respect of their insurance activities and would need to be authorised to provide claims management services. But I see the purpose behind the noble Lord’s amendment and will consider that further in advance of the next stage. I will come back to the noble Lord and the Committee with my views on what we might do to accept the way in which the noble Lord has sought to do this.
Compensation Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Compensation Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c321-2GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:35:21 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293723
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293723
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293723