Fee-for-service not holy grail

29 November 2016
| By Malavika |
image
image
expand image

The fee-for-service model for risk advice is not the holy grail and will not necessarily be a more professional way to charge clients than a commission model, according to Synchron.

The risk advice firm's director, Don Trapnell, said there was an argument that it was more professional for advisers to charge a fee-for-service or a fee to compensate for a curb in commissions.

"For the life of me, I can't understand how charging a fee is viewed by some as a hallmark of professionalism and I can't understand the argument that says receiving a commission translates to being less professional," Trapnell said.

Trapnell argued that charging commissions might be more professional than a fee-for-service model because advisers only received commissions if they were able to achieve a result for the client.

"Within Synchron, advisers charge as they wish — fee-for-service or a commission model — with no impact on their professionalism," Trapnell said, adding advisers would still get paid under a fee-for-service model for trying to achieve cover whereas they would only receive commissions if the policy remained on the books.

"Would clients be happy to pay a fee-for-service then find out they don't actually get insurance cover because they haven't been accepted? Or because the premiums were too high and they couldn't afford to pay them?" he said.

He cited the example of the UK, which removed commissions on investment products but not life insurance because it recognised life insurance was a grudge purchase.

However, he did not suggest reversing policy on commission disclosure or to lobby for changes to the Life Insurance Framework (LIF).

"Let's get the legislation bedded down first. It's four years before the 60 per cent cap on upfront commissions comes in," Trapnell said.

"If we can get the legislation bedded down now, we will be able to refine it and maybe then we can look at reviewing the cap in line with what it actually costs to run a risk advice [business]."

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week 1 day ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week 1 day ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 2 days ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 2 weeks ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND