‘Law is the wrong way round’: Levy
Michelle Levy has determined “the law is the wrong round” ahead of the publication of the Quality of Advice (QOA) Review.
Speaking at the FPA Professional Congress in Sydney, Levy, who was reviewer of the QOA, was interviewed by FPA chief executive, Sarah Abood.
“The main thing that has occurred to me is the law is the wrong way round. People have complained about its inflexibility and how it could be easier to understand and apply.
“The law focuses on what the people who need to give advice with and what documents they should provide when it should be focused on what does the consumer want? That’s how the law should be, it should be about helping consumers get better advice.”
She said she had been surprised how passionate the industry had been about the review.
“I have been surprised how personal it is for everyone, how invested and passionate they are about it and how passionate I am wanting to solve it. It is all I can think about now.”
The review was due to be presented to Government on 16 December and she said there were unlikely to be any huge surprises from the proposals paper which she said had been “well received”.
Regarding which parts could be implemented quickly, she said she believed changes to fee disclosure could be implemented quickly which would remove the requirement for a fee disclosure statement.
AUTHOR
Laura Dew
Recommended for you
A panel of advisers have argued charging fees accordingly is a top priority for the industry, but Peloton Partners has found firms are reluctant to increase them until the business pressure is “unavoidable”.
Equal weighted ETFs are gaining ground with financial advisers, according to AUSIEX, as they believe they can bring balance to client portfolios.
Financial services software and technology provider Fin365 has appointed a new executive chairman to the board to support the firm’s strategic growth plans.
The FSCP has issued a written direction to an adviser who charged clients “extraordinary fees” for inappropriate and conflicted advice, as well as encouraged them to switch their superannuation into a poorly performing product.
Some uncommon sense at last!
The FDS is not the time and cost consumer, its the annual opt in with one form for the supplier and another to satisfy ASIC. This was dumb and badly constructed rushed legislation.
Regime from the consumer perspective should look like this - The advice being given is labelled as either "independent advice" (meaning the adviser is not owned by the product provider) or "product information advice" (meaning factual information provided by the product supplier). Product information advice should come with a consumer warning that it is not independent financial advice, that there may be other alternatives and those alternatives may be better. Simples