Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'The price of success'

I've written several blogs about the payday loan industry in recent months saying, in summary, that I don't believe the concept of short term loans is fundamentally wrong and that emotion sometimes over-rides objectivity. But that does not mean that poor practice is ever acceptable. In particular I've ranted about the absence of evidence that affordability tests were being carried out and said the OFT should, in its final year, focus on this particular element.

Wonga's announcement that its pre-tax profits were up by 35% and bad debts were up by 89% has brought the sector back into sharp focus and - reading reports and commentaries - two things have struck me.

The first is Ian King, the Times Business Editor, observing that Wonga is one of the good guys in an industry that has appalling practices; by way of example he cites that it will not allow its customers to "roll" their loans more than three times and observes that the interest rates they charge are, for example, far lower than those incurred by running up an unauthorised bank overdraft. In my view, being cheaper than someone else isn't necessarily justification but it's certainly true and mitigates against some of the more emotional headlines we see. Indeed, elsewhere in the paper it's reported that loans cannot be rolled over more than twice and that Wonga stops racking up interest after 60 days to prevent debts spiralling too far out of control.

More worrying though is the quote from Wonga's Chief Executive, Errol Damelin, who is reported as saying Wonga loans were too small to be a significant problem and "it's very unlikely that a £200 or a £400 loan is what gets people into a financial mess". Perhaps by itself such a loan value won't, but as part of a vulnerable financial situation it can play a key role especially if it's taken out in desperation and as a last resort. I'd like to think Wonga is an exemplar in carrying out adequate and effective affordability checks but come on, Mr Damelin, get real - £400 MIGHT NOT be a problem for you but it could well be for some of your customers and potential customers!

 

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Stepping out of the bath'

After the good personal news I shared in my blog last week, there's been some heartening news on the economy this week.

The CBI's latest quarterly poll shows that the services sector, which accounts for two thirds of the UK economy, is growing at its fastest rate for six years. Last week, the Office for National Statistics lifted its second-quarter estimate for GDP growth from 0.6 per cent to 0.7 per cent. The EEF, the manufacturers' organisation, said that for the first time more members were reporting that the cost of new borrowing lines was falling than those reporting it was rising. The Bank of England's Deputy Governor suggested the Bank was sending a 'clear signal' that interest rates would not be raised any time soon reiterating the commitment made early in his reign by the new Governor Mark Carney.

 

The editor of our own magazine, Credit Management, drew attention to a number of other positive indices in his column in the September issue which hit doormats at the end of last week so perhaps the CBI is right in interpreting their numbers as evidence of a further build-up of momentum. Certainly, the conversations I'm having with businesses and organisations suggest an underlying sense of confidence that was missing a few months ago.

 

Few people seem to be overly buoyant but they do at least seem to  be moving from A glass half-empty to glass half-full mentality. In the early days of this recession when the debate was raging as to whether it would be V or U shaped, I remember one economist saying it would be bath-tub shaped, with the economy bouncing along the bottom for a prolonged period. It was a description I shamelessly stole and has proved to be pretty accurate.

 

I don't think we're off the bottom yet but I think we're looking upwards now rather than constantly looking behind us, and it does feel like momentum is building. Knowing how important confidence is to achieving recovery, let's do our bit by talking ourselves out of the bath tub.

Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Firing the imagination'

I talked last week about the flurry of consultations being launched by government ahead of the summer holidays and, guess what, there have been even more since I wrote those words.  It feels like I have spent every waking hour of the last ten days ploughing through page after page of government documents and preparing questionnaires and summaries to share with our members so they can comment and offer their views.

The latest to hit my inbox was HMRC's consultation document: 'Sharing and publishing data for public benefit', a set of proposals that "form a significant development in HMRC's Open Data Strategy".  Judged by the title, you wouldn't imagine this has much to excite credit professionals but ­ as is so often the case ­ there are nuggets hidden away that are very interesting.  Indeed, I would go far as to say that this one has genuinely excited my imagination. Why is that?

In amongst the detail, the paper suggests the possibilities of releasing of basic non-financial VAT registration data as public data, and sharing more detailed VAT registration data on a more restricted and controlled basis for specific purposes, such as credit referencing.  It also considers whether VAT registration data could provide a foundation for private sector business registers.  It is this last point that lights my fire! I'm old enough to remember the Business Names Register (I think it was called) which allowed a supplier to identify a business.  It ceased to exist years ago and no doubt someone reading this will remember better than me the background as to why, and when.  Since its demise, the ability to identify a business that trades as a sole trader or partnership has been incredibly difficult, and the proportion of businesses on which the credit reference agencies are able to report is incredibly low because of the dearth of data available to them.  I know the VAT threshold is currently £79,000 so the smallest businesses wouldn't be picked up but it would still be a huge step forward.  According to HMRC, around 800,000 VAT registered businesses are not incorporated so making basic information available to credit reference agencies would at least enable a business's existence, location, legal status, and trade classification to be verified.

Of course we'd prefer to have financial information as well but let's keep our feet on the ground; that's not going to happen any time soon.  In the meantime, please let me know what you think (the ICM In-Brief newsletter published on 14 August will have a link to the document but it can also be found here so we can make HM Government aware of our views.

I'm off to Scotland for my summer break shortly and I'm grateful to Charles Mayhew, Sue Chapple, and Sue Kettle who've agreed to do me the honour of writing guest blogs while I'm away.  If you too are heading for some time of relaxation in the coming weeks then make the most of them.  This is the only time in the year when I genuinely turn off emails (despite what I may tell Mrs K at other times!).  I'll look forward to returning refreshed and re-charged.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'End of term report: could do better'

Last week Professor Russel Griggs, Independent Reviewer of the Banking Taskforce Appeals Process wrote a guest blog and I'm grateful to him for sharing his thoughts ahead of the publication of his second annual report. It was an interesting blog and has prompted me to return to a theme I've written about more than once before: the need for greater awareness of the appeals process.

 

Despite the assurances I hear from senior bankers at government forums and elsewhere that the independent appeals process is being drawn to the attention of businesses who are declined loans, I hear too many examples where that clearly isn't the case. Not so long ago, I listened to a presentation by a regional bank executive who seemed unaware of the process at all and, more recently, one of our own ICM members shared his experience with me. After a 37 year relationship with his High Street bank, he was told that his overdraft facility was being withdrawn because it had decided to discontinue its relationship with all customers in that particular sector. He approached alternative banks and raised the issue with the Financial Ombudsman Service, several MPs, the OFT, and government ministers. Neither his nor the other banks, nor one of these parties pointed him towards, or made him aware of, the independent appeals process.

 

I've always said that banks must be free to make their own lending decisions and I've resisted all the voices suggesting that banks must be 'forced' to lend. I stand by that view. The appeals process was intended to create an environment in which businesses could be assured that a loan declined had been declined fairly or provide an opportunity for such decisions to be reviewed and reversed when appropriate.

 

I expect Russel Griggs' report to show the process is working well when it is used and this should be applauded, but it can't work if people don't know about it. The banks, and government, aren't doing enough to bring it to the attention of customers and the wider business, financial and political community. They must do better.

 

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM -'Directors must take responsibility for their actions'

I received the report from the House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills Committee on The Insolvency Service (Sixth Report of Session 2012/2013) recently. In more everyday parlance, this was the report from the Select Committee that met last October and heard evidence from the Insolvency Service, R3, the Insolvency Regulatory Bodies and others. One of the comments in our submission has been somewhat over-stated,  and our words used out of context, but I am particularly pleased at the inclusion of another reference which says: 'The Institute of Credit Management summarised the concerns of many of those who submitted evidence to us when they commented: "We would be greatly concerned if the reductions in budget [of the Insolvency Service] resulted in a degradation or reduction of Disqualification Unit activity. We believe any such dilution of activity would send entirely the wrong message to delinquent directors at a time when corporate insolvencies are likely to increase".'

 

In connection with the disqualification of directors, the report points out that 'disqualifications have halved over the last couple of years………whilst the number of directors disqualified each year has remained relatively stable over the past decade (approximately 1,200 a year), the number of cases of misconduct identified by Insolvency Practitioners in the same period has risen from 3,539 to 5,401…..the disqualification rate has fallen from 45% in 2002-03 to just 21% in 2011-12.'

 

It is widely accepted that the UK is one of the easiest countries in which to start a business, and that's good, but business owners need to show some responsibility in return for the 'veil of incorporation' which limited company status affords them. If a company can be formed with £1 issued capital and the directors have no personal liability, there have to be consequences if they are found to be guilty of misconduct that leaves their creditors out of pocket. Insolvency Practitioners are required to submit a return identifying where they believe misconduct to have occurred and they have the right to expect their report to be acted upon. Currently only 20% of reports are taken forward to disqualification and that's not good enough so I'm delighted that the Report recommends 'that the Department provides the Insolvency Service with sufficient, and if necessary, additional funding to disqualify or sanction all directors who have been found guilty of misconduct.'

 

Let's encourage entrepreneurship and initiative but let's not turn a blind eye on sharp practice that leaves suppliers with bad debts and impacts negatively on their business and the wider economy. I happen to believe there should be a minimum amount of issued capital required to form a limited company so that directors and business owners take their responsibility more seriously but I'll save that argument for another day. In the meantime, let's hope the Select Committee's recommendation is fulfilled. It definitely needs to be.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Re-arranging the deckchairs'

The report from Lord Heseltine released this week - No stone unturned in pursuit of growth - contains some interesting proposals. I'm writing these words within hours of publication so I won't pretend for a minute to have read and digested all 89 recommendations but I have scanned the chapter focusing on localism, and building on our strengths.

 

The report says we must 'reverse the long trend to centralism' and goes on to propose we should 'empower local places by letting them take the initiative to generate local growth, in partnership with central government', and 'we must ensure that the incentives and structures of local places are organised in such a way as to secure the greatest possible economic contribution, with each area able to play to its natural strengths.’

 

It's difficult to argue with this - local people should be more aware of the needs and opportunities in their area - and this should therefore be more effective than funding being handled, and activity controlled, from the centre. However, if the 29 current Local Enterprise Partnerships, and their predecessor Regional Development Agencies have demonstrated one thing, it is that some local organisations are better than others.

 

Lord Heseltine says ‘...growth is everyone's business. Government can set national policies and create an environment where business can flourish, but success depends on businesses and individuals working together. As we prepare for growth we must - each and every one of us - do all in our power to advance it. It is not someone else's problem.’

 

Good true words but if a local infrastructure is going to work as we all want, then it needs to deliver consistently well and effectively across all regions. If it doesn't, we're in danger of just rearranging the deck chairs under a new name.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Measure for measure'

The Government has this week published its response to the BIS Select Committee's report on Debt Management published in March and it makes interesting reading.  The original report contained 23 recommendations and the government responds to each one in turn. The document can be found here and what pleases me is the measured and proportionate nature of the responses.

 

The timetable for the planned review of the regulatory framework, including the transfer of regulatory powers from the OFT to the FCA, is set out with the final transfer expected to take place by April 2014.  Having a clear timetable and plan including expected consultation dates is helpful.  The more interesting aspects, however, relate to payday loans and debt management companies.

On payday loans, the Government refers to the work it has been carrying out with the four main trade associations representing over 90% of the payday loan market to improve consumer protection in their codes of practice.  These improvements together with the OFT’s review investigating levels of compliance with the Consumer Credit Act are, in my view, the right approach before any more stringent measures are considered.  Furthermore, the codes include measures to address the issues of rollover loans, affordability assessment, and continuous payment authority, and the Government has undertaken to review how best to include high-cost credit transactions in credit files.

In summary, close engagement with the trade associations to introduce enhanced consumer protections into their codes of practice and their commitment to publish a common industry-wide Good Practice Customer Charter setting out in a clear, concise and user-friendly format what customers of payday and other short-term loans should expect from their lender is positive and encouraging.  One can never condone poor practice but I believe payday loans have their place in certain circumstances and meet a particular need.

With regard to Debt Management companies, the Government is working with stakeholders to develop a Protocol of best practice for debt management plans which will cover transparency of fees and costs (particularly where they are upfront), misleading advertising, and safeguarding client accounts.  Again, in my view, working with the industry and trade bodies makes absolute sense before considering legislation and heavier regulation.

 
It's worth also noting that – in both cases – the approach being proposed will deliver faster results than would be achieved by the introduction of legislation.  Finally, as an aside, I have to mention again my particular soapbox that Debt Management Plans should be reported in the insolvency statistics so that the published numbers are a true representation of personal insolvency levels.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Pomp and circumstance'

Well, my wife Mary and I celebrated our 34th wedding anniversary last weekend. Although our celebrations didn't quite match up to those of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, we nevertheless had a great time and it was good to have an extra couple of days off!  The royal pageantry was amazing and impressive, and I confess to being mesmerised by the way images were projected onto Buckingham Palace during Monday's concert. Even on television, it was simply awesome, and it was certainly one of the weekend's highlights for me.

On a more everyday subject, I was interested to read the report about bank loan appeals last week.   Professor Russell Griggs, who I know well, was appointed independent arbitrator under last year’s Project Merlin pact between Government and the banks, with a remit to adjudicate when companies with sales of up to £25 million feel that they have been unfairly refused credit.  Most appeals were from retailers, construction companies, restaurants and hotels complaining about limits placed on overdrafts or credit cards. Half of the amounts in dispute were sums of less than £5,000, although a few were higher than £1 million.  During the first year of the scheme, 114,000 applications (14 percent) were declined by the Taskforce banks, of which 2,177 were taken to appeal.  Of these, the report reveals that 39.5 percent were successful.

Professor Griggs says he thinks the numbers are reasonable, given that no one had any idea how many appeals there would be, but that the banks need to ensure all customers know they can appeal, which not all do currently and that needs to change.  He adds the suggestion that, if more knew they could appeal, there is a possibility more might apply for credit in the first place.

That is perhaps one of the most worrying comments in the whole report.  My experience of talking to many SMEs is that there is limited awareness of the appeals process, even from companies who genuinely believe they, or their financial numbers, have been misinterpreted by a banker.  We can all play our part in making small businesses aware of the process, details of which can be found at: http://www.icaew.com/~/media/Files/Technical/Business-and-financial-management/SMEs/BBF%20Factsheet%20Appeals%20Process.ashx

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - ' The long and the short of it'

I've been to some interesting meetings this week but one, in particular, reminded me of the importance of looking at both the short and the long term.

Businesses often make decisions that seem right at the time but can then look back two, five, or even 30 years later and realise how flawed their thinking must have been.  I was reading a book recently that reminded me that, in 1982, IBM didn't buy Microsoft because - at $100 million – it was too expensive, and there are countless other examples of businesses failing to take, or turning down, an opportunity that would have been transforming.  I've been listening to Steve Jobs' autobiography in the car over the last few weeks; Nolan Bushnell's decision not to invest $50,000 in return for 33% of a company that recently hit a valuation of $600 billion must stand out as the biggest of all big missed opportunities (although he's done pretty well out of speaking in public about that missed opportunity)!

It's all too easy to make decisions for the short-term that fail to cater for the long term needs of the business and we often see very senior people lose their jobs (football and FTSE100 companies are primary examples) because short term results are not good enough.  The problem with this is that short-term expediency ends up driving the organisation and that often isn't best for the business, its people, or the economy.  CIMA published a fascinating report recently called Rebooting Business: Valuing the Human Dimension.  The report draws on the experience and views of a number of senior business leaders and to quote from the summary:

"If they get the human dimension right, companies will be able to focus their resources on the right things and create value for the long term.  One of the greatest challenges to realising the potential of the human dimension is the level of focus on quarterly reporting and short-term results. The value that people add will not appear in the quarterly reports and may not be apparent in the short run, but it must be given its due if we expect to make the right decisions.  Adopting strategies that will sustain success for a business is not a 'nice to have'………….."

One of the ICM's key priorities is to work with organisations and individuals to raise the value of the human dimension in business by developing the careers of credit professionals and by raising the performance of the teams they work in and run.  It's great to hear serious business leaders recognising that people are as important as numbers, and need to be a priority for sustainable business.