Low level of advice skills at the FSA
Share
Less than half of the 241 staff in the FSA’s small firms and contact division have a full financial advice or mortgage advice qualification at QCF level three or higher.
According to figures obtained by Money Marketing through a freedom of information request, just 17 of the 241 staff in the FSA’s small firms and contact division have a full financial advice or mortgage advice qualification at QCF level four or above. The division has 10 supervisors with full financial advice level six qualifications.
Of the 92 supervisors with QCF level three full financial planning or mortgage qualifications, 44 have the old financial planning certificate from the CII, three have the CII’s certificate in financial planning, which replaced it, and four have the ifs School of Finance’s certificate for financial advisers.
On the mortgage side, 30 have the ifs School of Finance’s certificate in mortgage advice and practice at level three and 11 hold the CII’s mortgage advice qualification, also level three. Three supervisors have a level four mortgage qualification.
Of its supervisors with full level six qualifications, the division has one Chartered Insurance Institute chartered financial planner, six staff with the
CII’s advanced financial planning certificate, two fellows of the CII and one associate of the Personal Finance Society.
One supervisor has the certificate of compliance regulation and one has the UK certificate in compliance.
Under the retail distribution review, the FSA is forcing all advisers to gain a QCF level four qualification by January 1, 2013.
In May, advisers called for the regulator to raise the qualifications of its own supervisory staff in line with the RDR changes.
Syndaxi Chartered Financial Planning managing director Rob Reid says: “This shows that not very many supervisors in the division are qualified to a significant level. It would be very hard to make a judgement about the advice IFAs are giving if they do not have any financial advice skills themselves.”
An FSA spokesman says: “Financial qualifications are not a prerequisite for employment in the FSA. The skill set for supervisors is different to that of financial advisers who offer advice to their customers on retail investment.”
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 | 50 per page
Readers' comments (38)
Anonymous | 19 Aug 2010 9:26 am
Do as I say, not as I do!
Surely the skill set for supervisors should be higher than those for whom they are supervising?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter Herd | 19 Aug 2010 9:27 am
Can not believe this and this is the regulator that came up with the RDR process.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 19 Aug 2010 9:29 am
Those who can do... Those who can't regulate.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Nick | 19 Aug 2010 9:33 am
presumably they will all have to be at Level 4 by RDR or leave the industry?
HA! fat chance!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Julie | 19 Aug 2010 9:36 am
Makes you a bit suspicious as to the REAL motives behind the RDR doesn't it??!!!
I think we all worked that one out a long time ago!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
MA | 19 Aug 2010 9:36 am
To be fair when they let some adviser loose on the general public after passing CF1 'provided that they have supervision' (how far this supervision actually extends is debatable!!) this really doesn't surprise me.
Lets be honest based upon the industry as a whole looking at contact centre staff you can hardly say that when as an IFA you speak to someone in a life office that they're likely to be fully FPC/CFP qualified. Surely the thing to do it as for the level of qualification in the same way that our clients have every right to ask for ours.
Having spoken to a rep at Woolwich about 6 months ago for a case update to be given the jargon in an apparently 'efficient manner' to then be told after asking a specific question he'd only worked there for a day it's not a revelation.
Yes this shouldn't really apply at the FSA but than thats life I'm afraid. At least they have qualified people at the top (which is more than can be said for some of the head of the banks)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 19 Aug 2010 9:37 am
the title says it all
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 19 Aug 2010 9:38 am
Now we know for certain why so much rubbish comes out ofthe FSA. They have no idea how an IFA works. A few have qualifications but I expect none have work experience. This is a disgrace
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 19 Aug 2010 9:38 am
Ah! But they are very skilled at writing huge meaningless documents that cost a fortune to print, take us weeks to read and understand so that we cannot get things right even if we try.....surely that justifies their huge salaries?
Perhaps qualified people would write documents in plain English telling the reader what is required - oh yes - just like when a qualified IFA writes a suitability report for his/her client, because if it was over complicated and hard to understand we would be accused of not treating our customers fairly wouldn't we? Duh!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Incompetent Regulators Awards Team | 19 Aug 2010 9:43 am
Something I have gone on about for years.
What about the FOS probably even worse and they make major financial decisions on adjudications for compensation on ther behalf of clients with a total lack of knowledge, understanding, experience and NO EVIDENCE. There have been some outrageous decsions made by unqualfied adjudicators and ombudsman alike.
I was told by an X-FOS adjudicator that all staff have been told from senior management not to answer any questions regarding their qualifications to anyone who may ask. What have they got to hide? Nothing, because they have none. For the record if there was an audit on firms who feel they have been hard done by then the FOS would be shut down for incompetence and assisting fraud. Go on SOCA get the boot in.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment