View more on these topics

Alan Hughes: FCA needs to set out guidance for execution-only

Specific guidance is needed on the exact definition of advice

Hughes-Alan-MM-Grey-250x255.jpg

The implementation of the RDR was widely predicted to lead to a surge in execution-only business, with advice less accessible to the mass market. This prediction appears to be coming true, as Hargreaves Landsdown’s recent results have shown.

This issue is attracting the interest of the “new” regulator, the FCA. Rory Percival at the FCA has said that the regulator will be looking closely at this, and that a “no advice” disclaimer will not act as a get out jail free card for firms.

Rather, the FCA will look at the substance of the transaction and if it looks like advice, then the FCA will consider it to be advice, regardless of any disclaimer.

I do not consider the FSA’s overall approach on this unreasonable – firms should be clear about what service they are intending to provide and all parts of that service, not just the disclaimer at the end, must be consistent with that. If not, firms are asking for trouble.

This is consistent with guidance that has appeared in the FSA Handbook at PERG for many years around the difference between information and advice.

Perhaps what is missing at this point is some more specific guidance from the FCA aimed at the burgeoning execution-only market.

The FCA is going to look at this issue more closely as part of a Thematic Review in the third quarter of this year.

The most constructive thing for firms to do would be to lobby strongly now for that review to result in some specific guidance for this part of the sector. Such guidance would be consistent with the FCA’s stated approach of being more proactive than the FSA and trying to prevent problems before they happen, rather than just reacting after the event.

One key issue that firms should also bear in mind is that in most cases it is unlikely that a legal test would be applied to this issue.

In reality, most claims or complaints would end up with the Financial Ombudsman Service who may consider the legal position, but are certainly not bound by it.

The FOS’ statutory duty is to decide cases based on what they consider to be “fair and reasonable” in the circumstances of each case.

This gives the FOS very wide discretion and a judicial review (the only way to challenge a FOS Final Decision) of a FOS Decision based only on the fact that the FOS has not applied the same approach as the courts, would be doomed to fail.

The FOS and the FCA will openly pursue a consistent approach to these matters – this is confirmed by the Memorandum of Understanding between the two bodies – and so, ultimately, it is likely that the FCA will be driving overall policy on this issue, not just its own but the FOS policy and approach as well.

It is therefore crucial that the FCA clarifies its position sooner rather than later, preferably with specific guidance, and that it does not fall into the trap of its predecessor by waiting for a drop in the market to cause client losses, and then assuming that firms must be at fault and expecting those losses to made good.

In genuine execution-only services an element of “caveat emptor” must apply and “consumers should take responsibility for their decisions” as clearly stated at s5(2)(d) of the FSMA 2000. 

Alan Hughes is partner at Foot Anstey

Recommended

1

Yorkshire and Clydesdale Banks set aside further £38m for redress

Yorkshire and Clydesdale Banks have set aside a further £38m to cover “customer redress issues”, including £15m for interest rate swap misselling. The banks, owned by National Australia Bank, published its half-year results to the end of March last week. The results reveal that over the six month period, Yorkshire and Clydesdale Banks have made […]

NatWest Intermediary Solutions enters Help to Buy and NewBuy

NatWest Intermediary Solutions will start accepting applications from intermediary clients using the Government’s mortgage indemnity scheme NewBuy for the first time and has launched two products for the shared equity element of Help to Buy. From tomorrow, intermediary borrowers will be able to choose from two specific Help to Buy shared equity products: a two-year […]

Developing your personal relationships – Webex

Read more 9amFinancial advisers and solicitors working together Presented by Ian Muirhead, director & chairman at Solicitors for Impartial Advice (SIFA) Listen to Ian’s expert insight and experiences of how financial advisers and solicitors can work together to deliver mutual benefit and enhanced client outcomes. Register here 10am Financial advisers and accountants working together Presented […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Julian Stevens 14th May 2013 at 9:24 am

    So how does Hargreaves Lansdown manage to offer its Vantage SIPP on an E-O basis to all and sundry, apparently without attracting untoward attention from the regulator? Perhaps that’s about to change.

  2. I certainly think that certain execution only websites, some very successful ones, shouldn’t be allowed to have bestbuy lists etc. All they should be allowed to provide is information only.

  3. @Sean 9:26am

    I agree. I think these websites that are claiming to provide information only and no advice are sailing very close to the wind. It is about time someone held them to account over best buy lists etc. Simply sticking a sentence at the bottom of your website stating that you haven’t given advice is not enough.

  4. It is interesting that there is an article today regarding Equitable Life when many of those who used them did so to cut out that nasty financial adviser who wanted to be paid for his time.

    We now have the situation where RDR and the proposed ban on consultancy charging on Group Pensions is pushing the public towards DIY again – who will be expected to pick up the bill when it all goes wrong?

  5. RegulatorSaurusRex 15th May 2013 at 5:48 pm

    I may be extinct but I know how silly it would be for a regulator to set out guidance in this way.

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com