The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has issued a warning to financial service firms seeking to operate under ‘general advice’ models.
ASIC commissioner, Danielle Press said that ASIC was seeking to address misconduct and consumer harms that might arise from the industry’s shift towards ‘general advice models’ including consumer testing more appropriate labels and alternative warnings for general advice.
She said the work was intended to build on ASIC’s Mid the Gap report published earlier this year which revealed substantial gaps in consumer comprehension of general and personal advice.
Press said that ASIC would also be commissioning further research in 2020-21 to explore whether consumers had unmet advice needs in a project which would examine the state of the financial advice industry, the demand for and supply of financial advice and what measures might be required to reduce any gaps between supply and demand.
“Finally, we are also assisting Treasury to implement the other Royal Commission recommendations relating to financial advice for which legislation is expected to be introduced and passed by mid-2020,” she said.
Comments
Yes, otherwise known as "you're going to be flicked off & no one will give you any advice", because of ASIC & FOFA's "we can't get paid to service you" model. This is happening right now, due to the failure of the Opt in law, & the Govt allowing consumers to be get ripped off under IntraFund advice laws. Out here in the real world, the investment manager registers are quickly filling with multiple small accounts, as no one wants to service them - even worse than pre 1985, before servicing fees were originally introduced. What an absolute disaster, soon to be worsened by the Haynes RC recommendations.
I assume ASIC will be looking at the general advice provided by industry funds. Every Adviser can tell you about the horror stories clients have had dealing with them.
Industry Funds only provide their members excellence in advice and general advice. The problem is with advisers like GT whom can not compete against industry fund advisers., Compare the pair Industry Super adviser professional and gets results vs GT a dodgy bank adviser with excessive fees and commissions. No wonder you are better with an industry super planner!!! Like one of our advertisements it looks like you sucked one of my lemons GT
If Industry Super Planner are so great, why not try this for an idea. Stop charging every member a fee for your services which are only received by a few, effectively a commission and refund that fee to all the members who it has been charged (taken from their retirement savings). Industry Super if your are correct that they are so great can simply charge a fee to the member who requests the advice only and charge it directly to that member. Remember, get a Terms of Engagement signed first and be clear on the scope of the advice ie, will the advice simply recommend using Industry Super?
Like my idea?
Thank you Wondering. I agree with you Industry Super Funds and Financial Planners are the best.
Some Industry Funds provide simple advice to their members for NO COST. Imagine that!! Free An example of this is State Super. No wonder such hatred from other planners. We are held to the same standards of research and acting in clients best interest. Compare the pair. Client see Wondering for simple advice and charged a fee VS client see Industry Super Planner seeks simple advice and is provided for free. It is a no brainer to go to an Industry Super Planner. Industry Super Planners are the best it makes you feel sorry for the rest. It looks like you need to revisit your business model before you are confined to extinction
Hi Industry Planner. I recently spoke to a First State Planner - who managed more than ten other First State Planners. He seems to be very proud of the fact that they charged very little for and SOA and even prouder of the fact they had no ongoing service fee. When I asked him what the overheads where, how many SOA's did they need to do to cover just their salaries and bonuses, he had no idea. Life is simple when you take money from all members to pay your salary and then do a days work here and there for a few clients and tell everyone how good you are for charging someone so little.
Also seems they were very consistent with product recommendations - guess where? The hint is - who pays his salary and bonus......
I came away with a clear understanding why they don't do ongoing service.
Wondering it is disappointing that you try to mislead
I hope this is not a refection of the advice you provide to your unfortunate clients
State Super does offer ongoing advice
The simple truth is you can not compete with Industry Super funds and you know it
You should advocate that your clients pay less fees to maximise their retirement savings instead of funding your extravagant and hedonistic lifestyle funded by you guessed it your clients retirement savings. Industry Super Planners are reducing fees as you have stated.
What have you done? Charge your clients the highest fees you can get.
Haha industry super planners are the H&R Block of the planning world. Sure, if you're a simple client with simple needs go to a simple planner. If you want quality holistic advice, go to someone that has the track record and capability to deliver that advice. Tell me Industry Planner, how many SMSF or Family Trusts have you recommended your clients setup? I'm willing to bet it's zero, because that would take funds away from the mothership, whose teat you milk for your meagre salary.
Felix you are wrong. I have recommended numerous smsf when appropriate. It is worrying you are giving advice on family trusts when legally only a estate planning specialist can provide advice on family trusts. ASIC should come after you and ban you as you provide advice in areas you are not authorised to provide. I feel sorry for your dealer group and I am sure your compliance would be horrified taht you can not act compliantly. It is people like you felix that destroy the industry. If you truly care about the industry you should resign. You could be a bank planner? That wouyld make sense
If you don’t think a planner can be qualified to provide advice on family trusts your education standard is alarmingly poor. Thank heavens you can’t do any damage in the real world. Life is just fine in the self-licensed IFA market thanks, but have fun with your $50k super clients. Also you do realise that people have assets outside of super that need advice as well don’t you?
Felix I hope your compliance does not read money management as you are clearly in breach if you believe family trusts advice and establishment of family trusts and estate planning issues can be given by an unqualified individual like yourself. You are not permitted to provide estate planning advice. I highly doubt you are permitted by your licensee to establish and provide advice on family trust. Felix you are a compliance risk. I would hate to be your PI insurer or part of your dealer group as there are going to be some claims. If I were you I would speak to my compliance department and try to remediate before ASIC get you. It is cowboys like you Felix that destroyed the industry and brought financial planning into disrepute. The financial planning industry has no future while dodgy planners like you remain in the industry. What else do you do Felix? Get people to double gear with margin loans and I presume your never ending churning of insurance policies.
If you aren’t addressing the tax on inter generational wealth transfer and asset protection, you are failing the best interest duty test in a very large way. Indeed FASEA has made specific mention of this under their code of ethics that you cannot just deal with the client in front of you, you must consider other generations and implications. If you don’t hold the necessary qualifications to do your job properly, that’s your burden to bear, I do and will continue to act on behalf of my clients and their families.
Ha ha havent you studied the new fasea code yet? You cannot be paid on recommending volume for your masters. Where does that leave you isa planners who never recommend rolling out of your masters product? Fees need to be fair and reasonable..charging 100% of your clients for advice when only some use it is not fair and reasonable. Mmm yes we will see who the dinosours are. You guys are like amp 20 years ago with your little cross subsidised airy fairy cookie cutter advice!
All your comments are very entertaining but are very misinformed. Industry Super Planners are nothing like AMP Planners now or in the past. Industry Super Funds grow year on year. We are gaining greater market share at the expense of so called independent financial planners Industry Super and Industry Super Planners will be around long beyond AMP has gone out of business and with all due respect will be around long past your business are no longer in existence. I have some career advice for all of you. See the light sell your business while you can and become an Industry Super planners. I wish you well. Remember if you can not beat them join them. .
You are going to be exposed, and the Union Fund advisers will finally have to justify how they are collectively charging all of their member accounts for advice most of those members never receive. That is a total scam. And the campaign to expose this has only just begun.
Industry planner - you don't English very well. So glad you're not involved with high level clients, have to source clients for yourself or rely on your skills (or language and writing skills) to earn your income or else we'd have yet another dud sucking off the social security teat. Prefer your cost to come from your own uneducated members balances than out of my tax dollars.
The funny things is, there are plenty of solutions that advisers can use that have lower fees and better performance to Industry Funds. On top of this, Advisers can provide many other services and strategies that lame General "Advice" Advisers can't. Wait until the FASEA code comes into play my friend, your day will come, then its back to driving taxi's for you!
GT your comments reflect your poor ignorance about financial planning industry and financial planning in general. How can you provide a financial plan be cheaper then free as per industry super fund State Super unless you pay client for your advice, You would go bankrupt. Nothing will happen with FASEA code as industry super will get exemptions. That is guaranteed. We are very good lobbyists. Your representative body FPA is totally ineffective and not focused on its members but itself. GT that is why Industry Super Planners will get exemptions from FASEA code while you will be left with the burden to comply to FASEA code which will put more pressure and expense on you until you are driven into bankruptcy. It is ironic that the vitriol and hate filled rant and ill wishes you have tried to put on me will become reality for you. Like your soa rationale it lacks substance and research. If i were you GT I would sell my client book before ASIC bans you
I'll sell my book and join you in the general advice department. Sounds like a pretty easy gig!
Reply to Industry Funds - ASIC flagged this after their "Mind the Gap" report last year. If things are as you say in ISF world you will welcome this investigation, as the high ground the ISF world is setting will make ASIC's job easy to roll out as an Industry expectation. I would expect all IS Funds to demand ASIC focus exclusively on them.
Bob we provide more benefits then the normal retail planner. Best advice in the market place with the results to prove it. Example compare the pair etc. We Industry financial planners will be exempt due to our superior lobbying and influence unlike retail planners with the ineffective FPA. We welcome any investigation as we are the best financial planners in the financial planning industry and always act in our clients best interest unlike retail planners driven by profit and if employed by their kpis and revenue targets
All invested at 98% growth with unlisted assets. Just wondering how the conversation assessing a clients risk profile goes at Industry Super?
Reply to Industry Super ... please expand on your "Example compare the pair etc" relevance to Advice?
Also do you agree with this article (Maritime Super & Catholic Super ) https://www.afr.com/wealth/investing/should-these-super-funds-be-shut-do...
These are not bank owned funds - so why such low returns - who gives them advice???
Except you are offered bonuses, in addition to your "salary". Bonuses for Union fund advisers is morally acceptable, but bonuses for personal advice planners, isn't. The hypocrisy here is breathtaking.
Yes, it is pretty cruzy when you can rock up to work, paid salary & bonuses under the Intra-Fund "Advice" racket, while your Union Super fund members have no idea they are paying your salaries out of their admin fees. All this, while most of those members, who are collectively paying those advice fees, receive no advice. What an absolute scam. Taking dodgy to new heights.
Seems to be how the racket works at Industry Super.
I assume closing the gap will report that its too expensive for people to see planners now, plus they are all too busy studying at the moment to keep their jobs. So lets roll out the robots, and what is this I have one right here ready to go , what a co-incidence hey. This is sales one o one, cut the competitors off at the knees, make the demand....then be the supply. Smart people those at ASIC with their hands in the robot advice till..., this is easy, you destroy the competitors, or make it very hard for them to compete, and replace it with your products....what power they have.
Hang on you are right
I propose a boycott of providers whom undermine advisers. Lets refuse to pay ASIC fees that will teach them. Lets troll their social media and turn the public against providers who treat advisers badly. Lets make a difference. We have the power
Add new comment