The limits of regulatory capture: explaining the UK payment protection insurance mis‐selling scandal

To what extent does regulatory agencies' failure to protect the public from harm result from undue industry influence? We argue that “regulatory capture” is invoked too easily to explain regulatory failure. To re‐examine the relationship between regulatory capture and regulatory failure, we use process‐tracing to study UK regulatory decision‐making about payment protection insurance (PPI), a product synonymous with one of the largest financial mis‐selling scandals of all time. We analyze the case through three different perspectives on regulatory decision‐making: regulatory capture, organizational reputation, and organizational blind spots. The findings show that only the combination of all three theoretical lenses enables us to make sense of the Financial Services Authority's approach to PPI. We advance regulatory failure theory by showing how different external pressures on regulators and internal organizational constraints interact to result in failure, thus providing a comprehensive framework for the study of regulatory failure that future studies can apply.

Publication Details

Journal
London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Published
2025-11-11
Primary Topic
Regulation and Compliance Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The limits of regulatory capture: explaining the UK payment protection insurance mis‐selling scandal

London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Regulation and Compliance Studies
article

The limits of regulatory capture: explaining the UK payment protection insurance mis‐selling scandal

article en

Abstract

To what extent does regulatory agencies' failure to protect the public from harm result from undue industry influence? We argue that “regulatory capture” is invoked too easily to explain regulatory failure. To re‐examine the relationship between regulatory capture and regulatory failure, we use process‐tracing to study UK regulatory decision‐making about payment protection insurance (PPI), a product synonymous with one of the largest financial mis‐selling scandals of all time. We analyze the case through three different perspectives on regulatory decision‐making: regulatory capture, organizational reputation, and organizational blind spots. The findings show that only the combination of all three theoretical lenses enables us to make sense of the Financial Services Authority's approach to PPI. We advance regulatory failure theory by showing how different external pressures on regulators and internal organizational constraints interact to result in failure, thus providing a comprehensive framework for the study of regulatory failure that future studies can apply.

London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Regulation and Compliance Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.