Lakey threatens legal action over RDR
Share
Adviser Alliance has told the FSA that it will take legal action if the regulator imposes mandatory higher qualifications under the retail distribution review.
In its response to the FSA’s December paper on delivering the RDR, Adviser Alliance says the imposition of a QCF level four regime is “not only unnecessary but also illegal”.
Director Alan Lakey says: “We have consulted with our legal team and they advise that such an insistence can be successfully challenged through the courts.
“This will be vigorously pursued if the proposed restructuring is mandated.”
In November, FSA director of conduct policy Sheila Nicoll warned advisers that the FSA has clear advice that it can legally enforce a higher minimum standard of qualification. She said: “Our proposals are legal.”
But Lakey insists that legal advice is only an opinion before it is heard in a court and says the FSA is in a “very difficult area”.
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (17)
Incompetent Regulators Award Team | 26 Mar 2010 9:18 am
Well done Alan Lakey. This is where AIFA should have been working for IFAs and have constantly failed with Cummings at the helm playing politics and not looking after it's real members interests.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Harry | 26 Mar 2010 9:28 am
Alan, can we put an end to this bickering, please!
This is getting all too tiring and rather embarrassing for those who just cant seem to do exams.
A few weeks back I was at a J04 revision day where there were 6 "old school" IFAs (in their 50s) amongst the 25 delegates. I was shocked at how little they knew about pensions and basic changes since A-day. All the more baffling since they claimed to advise mainly in pensions !
In the eyes of the FSA, and indeed the public, these people should be banned from giving advice. If they can't understand simple rules and calculations how dare they advise people on their retirement planning?
I am fully supportive of the FSA to raise the minimum standard, as, lets face it, the exams are not really that hard are they?
If you pursue legal action, be prepared to be considered a joke.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alan Munro | 26 Mar 2010 9:37 am
Gentlemen, please. QCF level 4 is the equivalent of FIRST year at university. Do you really want the public to know that you find this level of qualification too challenging?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dan W | 26 Mar 2010 9:56 am
Hot air and bluster!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jane Mudge | 26 Mar 2010 10:16 am
I totally agree with Harry - if you can't be bothered to raise your game and do exams then get out of the industry and retire to the golf course. It's just laziness.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike Fenwick | 26 Mar 2010 10:34 am
More of an aside really ...
But when I realised that the FSA will no longer consider Warren Buffett as qualified to give investment advice, it kinda summed it up for me.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Gillian Cardy | 26 Mar 2010 10:37 am
For the record : I'm another one who wishes to be perfectly clear that this action is representative of only one section of the adviser community (and not the one I wish to be associated with).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26 Mar 2010 10:40 am
Just what is Alan Lakey afraid of?, I have worked in this industry for a long time and would be considered an "old " adviser. Its not stopped me signing up to improve my qualifications. The advisers that are challenging improvements are the ones that the industry can do without. Onward and upward to a PROFESSIONAL industry where advisers are respected.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26 Mar 2010 12:14 pm
you are all missing the point.
Alan is correct.It is illegal for the fsa to require higher qualifications before being able to continue to do the job you are already qualified to do.Those who support the regulators stance should be aware that this type of heavy handedness will not stop here.
You may have no trouble with level four or even level six, but what about a degree? Trying to run a business keep up with all the ever changing rules and regulations and study and sit exams whilst trying to maintain some sort of family life is nigh on impossible. This type of system is fine for those working in canary wharf. They have full salaries plus benefits during training. The rest of us have to fit it all in and still keep our business going at the same time.Thank you and Good luck Alan
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tony Slimmings | 26 Mar 2010 1:22 pm
Reply to Anonymous, level 6 is degree level.
As a qualified Chartered Planner I also think it is wrong for AL to bring this dispute in the name of IFAs, he does not and never will represent me.
I have always had to earn a living as a financial adviser, manage the requirements of a young family as well as study, so why is so hard to pass a few numpty diploma exams. If I had my way I would make Chartered or Certified compulsory for every adviser.
FPC has been the benchmark exam since 1992, 18 years, this bar should have been raised years ago.
Furthermore if I recall RDR was announced in 2009, it is now 2010 and we still have 2011 and 2012 to gain qualifications, why not gain the qualifications and then lobby the FSA for being heavy handed, not make us sound like a load of moaning sales spivs (or is that actually what so many are).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment