UK Parliament / Open data

Compensation Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 34:"Page 8, line 22, at end insert—" ““(2)   Regulations may, in particular, require the provision of information or documents relating to the applicant or to any person who appears to the Regulator to be connected with the applicant.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee was particularly concerned that the Bill does not specify what minimum criteria must be applied by the regulator when considering applications for authorisation. This group of amendments clarifies what those minimum requirements will be. Amendment No. 34 makes it clear that regulations can require applicants to provide relevant information about themselves and any other persons connected with the business. This will ensure that the regulator can properly assess the competence and suitability of those controlling the company—for example, the directors and chief executive of a limited company or the partners in a partnership. Controlling individuals will be required to provide personal information about criminal records, their involvement in proceedings before any court or tribunal and any findings against them by a professional or regulatory body. The regulator may check this information against criminal records, the Disqualified Directors Register or records of disciplinary action held by professional or regulatory bodies. On Amendment No. 40, we wanted to make clear that when granting authorisation, the regulator can determine the scope of that authorisation—both according to the type of claim handled and the level of advice provided. It is important that we reflect this for two reasons: first, the complexity of the regulatory task is directly related to the complexity of the work authorised persons undertake on behalf of consumers, so both the level of fees and the stringency of the authorisation process will need to vary accordingly; and, secondly, some rules will apply only to more complex work—for example, some rules would be relevant only if the claims management company offered advice to the consumer on their claim. I will be saying a little more about these other issues when we come to Amendment No. 35. On that basis, I hope that noble Lords will be able to accept the amendments and I beg to move. On Question, amendment agreed to.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c713-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top