Court raises bar for risk advisers

15 April 2014
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

A recent Victorian Supreme Court decision has significantly raised the bar on risk advisers and their duty to clients, according to risk specialist and principal of Integrity Resolutions, Col Fullagar.

Pointing to the findings in the case of Swannson versus Harrison handed down last month, Fullagar said the findings of Justice Macaulay had not only raised the bar on what was expected of risk advisers in their interactions with clients but, by implication, had opened to question whether they were being adequately compensated for those responsibilities.

The Victorian Supreme Court decision saw a risk adviser penalised when he moved a client from one long-standing insurance policy (which had been the subject of a significant premium increase) to another policy in circumstances where the client, while having consulted with a doctor, proved to have (at that point) undiagnosed pancreatic cancer.

If the client had remained covered by his existing policy he would have been eligible to receive a pay-out of nearly $1.5 million, but because the seriousness of his medical condition was undisclosed to the new insurance, the new policy was voided.

In the end, the court ordered that the client be paid nearly $739,000.

The judge found there was negligence on both parts, but found that beyond advising his client about his disclosure obligations and against immediately canceling the pre-existing insurance policy, the adviser should also have made further contact with the client to check his medical condition before ultimately writing the letter which cancelled the original policy.

Commenting on the implications of the case for the broader life/risk industry, Fullagar said that the court's findings suggested to him that the quality of risk advice could no longer be looked at in relative terms and that, in future, it would need to be looked at in absolute terms.

"And in absolute terms the advice in question, while sound in relative terms, did not get over the bar," he said.

Fullagar said there was no question that the court's decision had changed the underlying landscape with respect to how risk advisers should view their interactions with clients.

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...

6 days 21 hours 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...

6 days 22 hours 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 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 1 week 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 1 week ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND