1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184 
Forwarders win insurance exemption
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
FREIGHT FORWARDERS have triumphed in a long battle to win exemption from registering with the Financial Services Authority (FSA) if they wish to offer goods-in-transit insurance to their customers.
Since the Insurance Mediation Directive was introduced in January 2005 many freight forwarders have stopped providing customers with insurance because they believed registering with the FSA was too costly and too timeconsuming.
Now the Treasury has made an exemption for freight forwarders.
The British International Freight Association (BIFA) argued that the regulations were primarily aimed at insurers themselves rather than companies that offered insurance as an additional service. B1FA director-general Colin Beaumont says bigger freight forwarders have had to pay "tens of thousands" to register with the FSA, as well as dealing with a lot of red tape.
He adds that other European countries had already exempted their freight forwarders, so for the UK to have continued enforcing the regulation would have put UK businesses at a competitive disadvantage. Freight forwarders that have already registered with the FSA will continue to be authorised and liable for FSA fees until they cancel their authorisation, which can be done by downloading a form on the FSA websitc.
Beaumont concludes:"We were right to protect the interests of our industry, in the name of freedom to trade and in the face of unfair competition."