Aged care advice included in FASEA standards

25 May 2020

Financial advisers who avoid aged care advice risk failing to comply with the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) code of ethics, according to Aged Care Steps.

Aged Care Steps said three out of the 12 FASEA standards specifically required consideration of the client’s broader long-term interests, and best interest duty failed without this aspect covered.

The firm’s director, Assyat David, said: “Advisers must consider the entirety of a client’s retirement which implicitly needs to take into account not only the early ‘active’ years but also the potential changes to the client’s health and ability over time and the third phase of retirement – the frailty years”.

Related News:

David noted that, while not all advisers needed to be aged care experts, they needed to have a business solution that matched their business objectives as well as personal skills and expertise.

“Advisers need to build capabilities, confidence and efficiencies to ensure they are able to support clients throughout their frailty years,” she said.

 “Standard 2 requires advisers build confidence to actively start conversations with clients about imminent or future care needs for themselves or family members.

“This standard requires a proactive approach to identify needs both now and into the future.”

Recommended for you




Advisers MUST spend more money on our course to make sure they don't lose their jobs. I was accredited for aged care, funnily enough my dealership just changed the rules saying my course was too old, now yes you guessed it $3,500 to sit the dealership approved course. All at the same time of doing kaplan bridging courses and being audited internally, cant give aged care advice, need to pass the fasea test, well what about clients with share portfolios do I need to do a stockbrokers course too? And those with timeshare, need to do a timeshare course too? You look after pilots? Ok then to understand them you need to do a pilots course to understand what their goals are, then do a mind reading course as of course clients dont always say what they are thinking. . Where does it all end??? Good grief!

exactly. first there is the law, then there is ASIC's interpretation of the law (which they keep a secret), then there is the dealer group head's interpretation of the interpretation by ASIC of the law.

then there is the head of compliance at the dealer group's interpretation of the interpretation of the law by the dealer group head's interpretation of the law by ASIC.

and then there is the compliance officers' at the dealer group's interpretation of the head of compliance at the dealer group's interpretation of the law.

and this fireball of interpretation hurtles towards me and manifests itself on my desk as fucking unworkable gobbledygook which is not the law.

I am the only one in the whole chain of interpretations with an approved fasea degree and who has passed the exam yet my interpretation of the law doesn't count.

this is why financial planning is a shit show.

The End.

Because there are far too many snouts in the trough and Financial Services has become a blood sport for the media, the politicians, the consumer groups, the industry funds and a host of so called " commentators" who don't give personal advice, just " general advice" to the " general " public in the guise of media appearances, books, podcasts, radio and television debates and investigative journalists all looking for another Walkley Award to stack on the mantle piece.
Then we have the tax payer funded ABC who repeatedly uses subliminal messaging techniques and structured discussion pieces to cleverly espouse the ideals without appearing to be obviously biased.
Then there is a multi level car park of highly paid public servants in Canberra formulating opinions and regulations around an occupation and profession they are so removed from they couldn't see it if it was next to them.
And finally, we had Kenneth Hayne delivering a pre-determined and uninformed outcome from the Royal Commission delivering multitudes of recommendations without an assessment of the short and long term impacts on affordability, small business and the cost to the consumer.

.....and that is why it is a shit show.

This is a grubby tactic by Aged Care Steps, to use FASEA to flog more of their courses. Almost as bad as the unethical "ethicist" Simon Longstaff, who has abused his position on the FASEA Board to generate more course and book revenue for himself and his cronies.

Oh no!!...that couldn't be right...the Ethics Centre is a Not For Profit organisation that relies on donations from their supporters and consulting services....that would simply not be ethical.

One day the public will wake up to the fact that "not for profit" is one of the biggest scams going round. If you pay large amounts of the organisation's revenue to the controlling parties as salary and benefits and related party transactions, then of course they never make a profit!

Add new comment