Tuesday, 2 January 2018

GDPR 2018 Update Part I



THIS IS THE FIRST OF A TWO PART UPDATE ON GDPR FOR MORTGAGE INTERMEDIARIES. THE SECOND PART WILL BE ISSUED  BEFORE 5th  JANUARY 2018.



There is a lot of activity in relation to GDPR  in the industry at the moment as well as almost everywhere else! It is hardly surprising, as the new  data protection rules coming in in May 2018 for the European economic Area (EEA) are probably the most far reaching on the planet. Brexit will have  no bearing on the changes coming in and so the new rules are no doubt here to stay.

So what has to be  done? Below are a few things that we need to do.

Carry out a data mapping exercise.

This is not as heavy as it sounds. Basically, we just need to establish where you get data from, how you process it and who you pass it to (and whether any of these locations are outside the EEA). There are a number of convolutions around this but I will be providing some guidance on this during December, together with a basic model for a mortgage broker that should fit most firms.

The reason for the data mapping is to carry out an audit on where personal data goes so that you can identify who and where and then check that these potential data processors on your behalf are registered and tooled up to handle data (in terms of competence, security and back up). The model that I will produce should cover most of the firms or types of firm that you will be  dealing with and if there are any outside this, then we can discuss separately.

Data mapping also allows us to improve the completeness and coverage of our Privacy Statement (see below).

Privacy Statement and Consent

GDPR is going to require you so set out and explain to your clients who is processing their data, how you will process it and for what purposes, who you will share their data with, their rights and how you will keep their data safe. This is best done by documenting a Privacy Statement. This could be a standalone document or it could be incorporated into your Initial Disclosure Document (IDD). Although you don’t technically have to get the client to sign your Privacy Statement, you are required to keep a record of the fact that you have explained the key information required by GDPR and this is best demonstrated by getting a signature or email confirmation of receipt.

Under the existing rules, your client consents to you processing their data by the fact that they have contacted you to arrange a mortgage or insurance for you (and a member of staff, where applicable, by becoming your employee, Appointed Representatives and Introducers also). Under the new rules, the consent has to be evidenced. This could be a record that a conversation has been had and a Privacy Statement issued when combined with documented procedures that explain how consent is to be obtained and training for appropriate staff. However, the safest way to evidence consent is by having a document signed or otherwise uniquely confirmed (e.g an email) by the client. Such evidence could be a signature on a copy of the Privacy Statement or on a suitably documented IDD. It could also be a confirmation of some form contained within an email from the client’s personal email account. It should be noted that where one client is signing on behalf of a joint application there is a potential exposure if the other party then claims that there was no permission to sign on the other persons behalf. Suitable wording for joint applications could in part address this but it is recommended that where possible, all data subjects document their consent. As an aside here, there is a potential issue for adults living in the property to be mortgaged because their data will also be  recorded  in your files even to the extent that it is only name, age and address details. Therefore, where you are processing data relating to adults who are not party to the mortgage application but are resident or in any way involved in the transaction (another example would be  dependents or members of the family in Lifetime Mortgages) you will need to be  able to evidence that they have consented to processing their data in the same way. Please refer to the section below for further details. Web pages will also be dealt with below.

I have  produced a sample Privacy Statement and will be  issuing this document shortly. It will also be  available  from 1st January in the MI System.



Initial Disclosure Document

Rather than issue two documents to a client, I would suggest that the existing IDD is expanded to incorporate the Privacy Statement. I believe that the Data Protection part should be visually separate from the IDD text  but signature of the single document could be  taken for signature of both parts. Many firms still obtain signatures on the IDD as part of routine processing and so this will not be a big deal in most cases. I would emphasise that the date of the signature is also important as this is the date that the client consented to processing their data. This could mean that it is possible that you may begin recording client data before they have signed a consent but that can be delat with by making sure that the client is aware of the matter at the start of your conversation. The fact of issuing an IDD including the Privacy Statement within say 5 working days should be  adequate to satisfy GDPR as long as some verbal explanation has been given at the outset.

I have  produced a sample IDD in the form of a Terms of Business Letter as I do not believe the old IDD format originally put forward by the FCA is appropriate to comply with the GDPR requirements. Firms currently using the old style IDD should consider moving over to a Terms of Business in order to streamline their process. ICOBS allows a terms of business letter for insurances as long as it includes certain key data and the TOB that I have documented is also designed to comply with the current insurance disclosure requirements. It will also be  available  from 1st January in the MI System.



Appointing a person responsible for Data Protection and undergoing training within  the firm

GDPR requires that each Data Controller which may be an individual or a firm depending upon corporate status) appoints an individual with responsibility for Data Protection. That is no particular issue in its own right but with the new rules on their way some time next year for Senior Managers and Certification (SM & C), it means that there will need to be a robust document and that the individual will have been appropriately trained and competent. For most small firms this will not however be an issue as the sole Director, proprietor or senior partner will be the named person. Training can be  in any form. This document in its own right is a training document and, if you use the MI system, will be recorded in your training log there.

Where there are any other persons in the firm, all of them will need to be trained in the new rules. Whilst this document deals with much of the new requirements , a further GDPR Training Session will be issued in the new year and made available through the MI system for training to other members of staff. A recommendation would be that all staff, directors and business partners are trained, including Ars where applicable and their staff. It is also recommended that any introducers of business are provided with a suitable update (the Training Document to be provided at a later date, for example).

Thursday, 24 August 2017

GDPR - One of the biggest regulatory issues for next year


This is the first of a series of CPD updates on the new requirements for Data protection coming in in May 2018. I am keeping them short and to the point to make life easier for you. This document is basically saying that you need to have a Privacy Statement in place and that it should be issued to clients from within the initial disclosure document. The deadline for having this in place is 25th May 2018 but don’t let that date fool you.

Data Protection is going to be one of the biggest regulatory issues facing UK mortgage and insurance firms in 2018. GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) ls an EU directive that will apply in the UK from 25 May 2018. The government has confirmed that the UK’s decision to leave the EU will not affect the commencement of the GDPR.

It is going to be a big issue for a number of reasons.

Firstly, it is going to introduce the need for data subjects (your clients) to provide informed and unambiguous consent to the holding and processing of their data. This means that the client has to be told what you will do with their data, who it will be passed to , who the data controllers are and a number of other matters. Unambiguous consent differs from what we have now because it will almost certainly require something written down and signed or confirmed (by an action online for example) from the client before you can begin to process their data. Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity by the client will not be sufficient to demonstrate consent.

In addition, along with Data Subject Access Rights (DSARs), clients will need to be told that their consent for your firm to process data can be withdrawn at any time. Children’s data becomes an issue although probably not a major one for brokers as information about dependents will invariably be provided by their parents.

Secondly, the penalties for data protection breaches are increasing and there will invariably be a rash of very public enforcements of firms of all sizes in the early days to encourage the others. That is exactly what we saw from 2004 when the FSA took over regulation of mortgages and we should expect a repeat for Data Protection.

Thirdly, we have at last a bullish Information Commissioner who seems very keen to make a mark. We have over the past few years even under the existing rules, seen a significant increase in enforcement activity on  firms across various markets and this will most certainly continue.

So what does this mean for mortgage and insurance intermediaries?

It is early days but we need to start thinking about the actions to take. The most obvious one is that of disclosure to clients. Currently many firms still use the Initial Disclosure Document designed originally by the FSA (albeit now without the Key Facts logo). It was a document fit for purpose but in its current form it is inadequate to deal with the GDPR. So, step one is for you to consider moving to a Terms of Business letter that covers both your regulatory disclosures and your data protection obligations.  For those of you who use my MI System, there is an example of a terms of Business in the Library (although it does not address GDPR at the moment).

At the present time, what a good job looks like post 25th May is a Terms of Business letter that satisfies Mortgage Credit Directive requirements, covers the new Insurance Distribution Directive requirements (the subject of another CPD update) and includes a full Privacy statement for GDPR requirements. This document to be signed by clients or otherwise confirmed by some form of email or electronic wizardry.



The next article on Data Protection will look at the definitions and extensions to the meaning of information and the types of processing mortgage and insurance intermediaries typically undertake in order to see if we have any issues and concerns post 25th May 2018.

Friday, 17 February 2017

Can You Afford a £1 Million Fine?

A conversation with a firm recently reminded me of the importance and, arguably, the utter impossibility of checking the HM Treasury Sanctions list. By way of a reminder, this is a list that our Government has complied of individuals and organisations that we are prohibited from dealing with. You may recall a couple of years ago the then FSA sent out a survey on Systems of Control which included a question about whether firms routinely check against the Sanctions List.

Of course such checks are mandatory for all firms and, whilst the probability of  being approached by someone or an organisation on that list is quite low, the consequences are quite serious both for your firm and personally to the individual transacting.

From April 2017, the Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) will be able to impose penalties for serious breaches of up to £1 million or 50% of the breach - whichever is higher.

So what can be done?

Well a quick look at the first three entries on the Individuals Sanctions List  below indicates the scale of the problem when considering a visual search on screen. There are 136 entries for individuals and 5 entries for Entities for the Afghan Regime alone and that accounts for approximately 10% of the size of the list. Currently, the UK has over 27 United Nations, European Union and domestic financial sanctions in place, covering just over 1,900 individuals, groups and countries.


  • Extract from Afghanistan Regime Individuals List
  1. Name 6: ABBASIN 1: ABDUL AZIZ 2: n/a 3: n/a 4: n/a 5: n/a.DOB: --/--/1969. POB: Sheykhan Village, Pirkowti Area, Orgun District, Paktika Province, Afghanistan a.k.a: MAHSUD, Abdul Aziz Other Information: UN Ref TI.A.155.11. Key commander in the Haqqani Network under Sirajuddin Jallaloudine Haqqani. Taliban Shadow Governor of Orgun District, Paktika Province, as of early 2010. Listed on: 21/10/2011 Last Updated: 17/05/2013 Group ID: 12156.
  2. Name 6: ABDUL AHAD 1: AZIZIRAHMAN 2: n/a 3: n/a 4: n/a 5: n/a.DOB: --/--/1972. POB: Shega District, Kandahar Province, Afghanistan Nationality: Afghan National Identification no: 44323 (Afghan) (tazkira) Position: Third Secretary, Taliban Embassy, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Other Information: UN Ref TI.A.121.01. Listed on: 23/02/2001 Last Updated: 29/03/2012 Group ID: 7055.
  3. Name 6: ABDUL AHMAD TURK 1: ABDUL GHANI 2: BARADAR 3: n/a 4: n/a 5: n/a.Title: Mullah  DOB: --/--/1968. POB: Yatimak village, Dehrawood District, Uruzgan Province, Afghanistan a.k.a: (1) AKHUND, Baradar (2) BARADAR, Abdul, Ghani Nationality: Afghan Position: Deputy Minister of Defence under the Taliban regime Other Information: UN Ref TI.B.24.01. Arrested in Feb 2010 and in custody in Pakistan. Extradition request to Afghanistan pending in Lahore High Court, Pakistan as of June 2011. Belongs to Popalzai tribe. Senior Taliban military commander and member of Taliban Quetta Council as of May 2007. Listed on: 02/04/2001 Last Updated: 29/03/2012 Group ID: 7060.
Obviously, it is possible to do a SHIFT F3 search on a screen version of the Sanctions List but if you are looking for the name, Mohammed, then you have  136 entries to read through.

This all takes time and frankly, whilst it is mandatory, it doesn't add to the profit margins. Even if you use a system ( and there are a few out there) you still come down to the final point of responsibility. It is you as a controller who have to have in place a system to check the Sanctions List and you and if applicable, your employees or ARs or self employed staff must undertake these checks without fail.

Next steps

You must have  in place a procedure for checking the HM Sanctions List at the this address .
  • You must ensure that for each application for mortgages or insurances ( or any other business), a check is made of that list. My recommendation is check Surname first and if any occurrence, then also check full name. Depending on your level of confidence it might also be  worth checking just first name. Don't forget that these lists include names and aliases.
  • If any occurrences are found, then check the details of each entry as far as you are able, e.g. date of birth or any other details that you can find that might be  pertinent ( address history for example or passport details - not an exhaustive list).
  • Keep a record the result of your review and if you identify an issue or have a concern report it to Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI).
The  OFSI has issued guidance on the Sanctions List in December 2016  and, inter alia, includes the following text.

The consolidated list generally contains additional identifying information such as date of birth, passport details, nationality, last known address, and employment or government role.  You should consider all of the information that you hold on the person or entity you are dealing with against the information on the consolidated list to determine if you have a real match, usually known as a target match.

Where you have reviewed all of the information on the consolidated list against all of the information that you have about the person or entity and you are still unsure as to whether you have a target match, you can contact OFSI for assistance

Additional Point

The  reality of all this is that most searches will result in nothing being found but you never know and, as important, you do need to demonstrate that you have systems of control in place to deal with this.

If you currently use my MI System, you can find a new facility to check the Sanctions List in the Library Section under Fraud. This will report all the unique occurrences of the text submitted with details of each entry identified, including duplicates where there are aliases. You can print this off and keep it on file to demonstrate compliance.