Treasury will now assume responsibility of the Life Insurance Framework (LIF) review, preventing overlap with the quality of advice review.
Speaking at the Financial Services Council (FSC) Life Insurance Summit, Senator Jane Hume, said: “One of the things we’ve been trying to do, and you will see this around the announcement of the single disciplinary body, is to make sure we have alignment in the work we’re doing.
“A lot of good work has been done, particularly by the FSC on financial advice and we would like to see this feed into the quality of advice review.
“But it seems silly to have one review on life insurance at ASIC and another review about the quality of advice in Treasury when there’s going to be so much overlap.
Hume noted the review would consider the "full breadth of issues impacting on both quality and affordability of all forms of financial advice".
Hume said ASIC had already started its data collection but that data would now come back to Treasury for analysis.
"As we undertake the quality of advice review, important issues like the degree of underinsurance and maintaining access to affordable, quality advice will be at the forefront of our minds," she said,
"These elements will enable us to achieve the objective of a thriving life insurance sector that provides access to quality insurance products tailored to meet the needs of Australians and their loved ones at a time when they need it most."
Comments
To wreck or not to wreck, that is the question.
To wreck or not to wreck, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of unfounded criticism of the commission structure, or to take up arms and pens and reviews against a hard-working life insurance advisers, and by opposing, end them?
(with apologies to The Bard)
So the FSC who lobbied with the AFA/FPA to put LIF in place with O'Dywer in the first place is now trying to direct traffic to deflect the blame for possibly the worst piece of legislation in living memory. What's worse is it's going back into the hands of Codina in Treasury who gave the advice on this disaster in the first place. This Government is a conflicted joke.
Is this the government confirming what everyone knows, that ASIC is corrupt, inept and incompetent and therefore can't be trusted to do the review?
Senator Hume, you're too bleeding late !!!!
This kind of thinking should have taken place before the enactment of the LIF legislation!
You and your government have destroyed the life insurance industry with all participants involved being the obvious benefactors, because of the LIF legislation.
There are fewer life companies now than there once were, so there is no real competition in the market place for clients to get a benefit.
Most life companies offer the same inferior contracts with similar premiums, so there is no product differentiation that benefits the client.
Most companies, if not all won't guarantee level premiums on their products including those with life insurance.
With that kind of guaranteed uncertainty where a life company may increase their premiums between 30%-50% every 3 years on existing and new business, why would any client choose to participate in that most likely exercise and why would any adviser want to try and sell that notion , because they will be subject to a 2 year clawback.
Guess what, the horse has bolted, so shutting the gate now and seeing the exodus of advisers leaving the industry is your reward for ineptitude, incompetence and a clear lack of understanding of the environment you've created
Correct and just to prove it today AIA have increased premiums by 13.5% on their newly acquired comminsure policies including Level premiums
What a joke did not take them long
And as we strive to find our clients the best value policies for what they can afford I assume ASIC will assess this as churning ??
Fed up I got that email too. Not happy at all, lucky I have steered clear of commimsure and aia for the past few years, but I know for sure there will be lapses on my client base, its ok though they told me to reduce benefits and waiting periods so should be ok, untill clients claim and realise they no longer had that age 65 payment period and take me to court . So they are contributing again to a reduced pool of insured. Why dont they just increase premiums on new business to a sustainable level? Oh they want to be competitive, offer first year discounts, whilst stabbing the knife into the existing clients and twisting it every year or so. Its utter madness. If I ran my business like that id be bankrupt! On top of this had a pi insurance increase this week, asic levy increase, im expecting a dealership fee increase soon, and also I need to refund some fees from 2 years ago for services that were never agreed on with clients as my dealership is now asics lapdog. Yippee!
I also received a copy of the email.
It almost made me feel like telling clients they might as well cancel it anyway, because nobody is writing it and by the time they get to claim, they're likely to be another dozen premium increases causing insurance to be unaffordable anyway.
The best advice seems to be to tell them to save their money... :P
God help us, ASIC has already started on Data Collection.... probably stacking the stats in favour of what they want to see. :P Maybe we should be getting somebody unqualified to get our client data, then do the SOA....
“A lot of good work has been done, particularly by the FSC on financial advice and we would like to see this feed into the quality of advice review." - Totally out of touch Jane, but if you think it's more important to have alignment than a financial advice industry, so be it. :P
Treasury = Frydenberg.
Martin Codina is in Treasury and Freedenberg's main adviser on Financial Services for last 8 years.
This will then be another complete STITCH UP AGAINST Real Advisers by these 2.
Frydenberg & Codina have been instrumental in the DESTRUCTION OF REAL ADVISERS for last 8 years.
FRYDENBERG HAS TO GO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FRYDENBERG CANNOT BE TRUSTED BY ADVISERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Advisers need to REVOLT Against the LNP and Frydenberg.
And not one adviser or adviser association at the table.
Add new comment