Financial adviser exam a ‘cull’ mechanism, says AFA

The financial adviser exam requirements outlined by the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) would give rise to a “cull” of a large percentage of the financial adviser population, according to the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA).

In a submission filed with the FASEA responding to its proposals around the financial adviser examination, the AFA said it had never been its expectation “that the Professional Standards regime was the vehicle for a ‘cull’ of a large percentage of the financial adviser population”.

“It should also be recognised that very few, if any, courses and certainly no other professions are solely reliant on one single exam as the sole determinant of a professional’s ability to continue to operate,” the submission said.

Related News:

The AFA submission has argued that the FASEA process “should always have been a journey to assist advisers to ensure that they meet the standards expected in the future”.

“In reality, it appears to have become the complete opposite,” it said.

“The requirements set out in this consultation paper will, if they are implemented as proposed, achieve exactly that – a cull of many advisers,” the AFA submission said. “This exam will remove many good advisers who for one reason or another will struggle to pass such a challenging exam.”

“Put simply, if it was a four-hour closed book exam with no preparation materials and a limit of two resits, even the very best financial advisers will be highly challenged and anxious,” it said.

“One of the key skills of being a good financial adviser is the ability to put yourself in the shoes of your client and to understand their situation from their perspective. The same needs to apply in this case for the benefit of those impacted financial advisers, in that those setting the standards and those who are commenting on these standards, need to view these requirements from the perspective of those particular groups of advisers who will be most threatened by this exam requirement,” the submission said.

It said that among those most threatened were advisers who find examinations difficult or suffer anxiety and “those financial advisers in their 60’s and 70’s who have a passion for their profession and for their clients, however have not completed an exam for many years and will undoubtedly struggle when put into this position”.




Recommended for you

Author

Comments

Comments

As I have said before to your various posts, I have no professional or personal connection with ISA or industry funds at all. You seem to know more about them than I do.
But I do know about the other side and have a beef about that side's relative poor performances over the year, appalling ethics, slack corporate governance, and the rest. These things and more confirmed by the Royal Commission. All things you overlook or ignore in your fixation rants on unions, ISA and industry funds.

MM, this guy needs to be booted. Needless name calling, an inability to debate the issue calmly and rationally whilst calling people a "Dick". Very offensive. Joe needs help....and quickly. My thoughts and prayers are with you Joe Joey, I hope you get the love, the care and help you need.

Interesting isn't it 'Anne' how you and Hedware and all your other pseudonyms seem to perfectly align on subjects where ISA are mentioned or taken to task. It appears a case of split personalities perhaps? I have followed 'Joey Joe' and regardless of any earnest query he raises, it appears all of your pretended various personalities simply run away from answering. Your attempt at pulling the PC card is amusing at best but transparent as he called youout on that previously as well. Oh dear, what to do next?

Pathetic "Anne."

This is great entertainment and mirrors our society. Honest questions get deflected.
While I am at it, I have a Balanced fund with 80% shares and 15% property, of which 10 of that is in South East QLD, should anyone wish to purchase.

GD you have my interest, which fund please? We are aiming to compile a comprehensive 'report' on all known issues with industry funds, and specifically which ones to avoid from a risk ratio perspective, especially concentration risk as you have mentioned. If you could shed light on which one and the data that validates it I would be most appreciative.

Anyone remember the EPAS Fund, that monument to ISA smarts where they invested in nothing but property on the Gold Coast and then went bust losing all their members funds?

Well i dont actually have it, but around 12 months ago I saw it
My comment was a bit of a joke however go have a close look at NGS for an example ....

Add new comment