FSCP cancels insolvent adviser’s registration

A financial adviser has received a registration prohibition from the Financial Services and Credit Panel (FSCP) until 2025 due to insolvency. 

Financial adviser Timothy Anderson is prohibited from providing personal advice to retail clients on relevant financial products from 7 December 2023 until after 17 May 2025.

X

Continue to Website

The panel discovered he was insolvent under administration, meaning his adviser registration has been cancelled and he cannot register with ASIC.

“The Sitting Panel decided to make the registration prohibition order because it is satisfied that there is a real risk of harm being caused to the public’s confidence in the financial services industry, and to ASIC’s reputation, if an undischarged bankrupt is permitted to continue to give personal advice to retail clients about relevant financial products.

“The Sitting Panel is also satisfied that Anderson has demonstrated a lack of professional judgement and insight in relation to his bankruptcy.”

The FSCP delivers administrative decisions on matters referred to it by ASIC that relate to the conduct of advisers. 

The panel consists of a pool of industry participants, appointed by the Minister, which ASIC draws upon when forming individual sitting panels. Each sitting panel comprises an ASIC staff member and at least two members of the FSCP.

It operates alongside but separately from ASIC’s existing administrative decision-making processes, with aims of responding to lower-level misconduct and ensuring that minor misconduct does not go unaddressed. 

The FSCP has the power to make a registration prohibition order under s921L(1)(c) of the Corporations Act.

In August, the panel announced a ‘written reprimand’ for the first time. This addressed the issue of a relevant provider recommending in a statement of advice (SOA) that the clients switch their superannuation from one fund to another, and transfer their life and TPD insurance (through super) to another provider.

Upon discovering the full amount of cover could not be transferred without further underwriting, the relevant provider did not revisit the advice but instead recommended in a record of advice (ROA) that the clients apportion their cover between the new and existing provider up to the maximum amount allowed without underwriting.