View more on these topics

David Tiller: Advisers face paying the price for lack of automatic switching


If the maelstrom of platform pricing launches, online debate and pricing heat maps over the past couple of weeks is anything to go by, the FCA’s PS13/1 is beginning to bite. We have seen a rush of platforms unbundling fee structures and re-engineering their business models but is the industry really entering a brave new world of transparency for all?

There is no doubt advisers have thrown down the gauntlet to platforms, transforming themselves into a true fee-charging profession alongside accountancy or law. We have also seen progress from fund groups and platforms with clean share classes now readily available and the unbundling of platform fees by April.

But of the almost £250bn of assets on platforms, how much is invested in clean share classes through an unbundled platform charging structure? Not nearly as much as we
may think.

A large proportion of assets are still held on platforms that have chosen to leave their existing clients in the old bundled share classes. By 6 April, they will impose explicit platform charges for new investments but have failed to kick the rebate habit for the large amounts of existing business they hold. They have side-stepped the opportunity to unify their prices for all platform investors, instead choosing to wait until this is forced on them in 2016.

Rather than one consistent charging structure for all, new clean investments may be paying lower total charges while the existing investments pay higher charges that are only partially offset through passing on some of the rebate.

There is no difference in the product – it is the same platform, the same manager, investing in the same assets in the same proportions. There is no difference in features – no increased frequency of dealing, no new sources of alpha (or beta for that matter). It is simply a different tariff. 

The date of the investment determines what the client pays, not the investment product they have purchased.

Differential pricing may help platforms avoid the rapid loss of revenue that might occur from a mass switch to a cheaper explicit charging structure but it does raise some additional questions. For example, how sustainable are these “new business” pricing structures?

If platforms are uncomfortable applying this pricing to all of their customers now, what makes them think they will be able to afford to in 2016?

Advisers are facing a conundrum. While platforms appear to be comfortable with differential pricing, can an adviser ever be? Which of their clients need to change tariff?

It seems likely that advisers will have to step in on their clients’ behalf if their platform is unwilling to put clients on the best available tariff. 

Experience tells us that most advisers will be uncomfortable charging their clients for this additional service, leaving them, once again, having to absorb the cost of regulatory change.

David Tiller is head of platform propositions at Standard Life


Poyntz-Wright-Nick-FCA-2013 500 x 320.jpg

FCA’s Nick Poyntz-Wright deals blow to ‘pensions passport’ campaign

FCA director of long-term savings and pensions Nick Poyntz-Wright says the regulator is unlikely to impose specific standards on pension providers’ at-retirement communications following its review of the annuity market. Poyntz-Wright’s comments, which follow the publication of the regulator’s annuities review last month, will be a blow to campaigners who want to see a simple “pensions […]


FCA sets out plans to overhaul £1bn GI add-on market

The FCA has set out plans to overhaul the £1bn general insurance add-on market which include banning pre-ticked boxes and forcing firms to publish claims ratios to highlight low value products. Add-ons products are sold alongside or bolted on to another financial products such as home or motor insurance, or alongside retail products such as […]


The Times links with Bestinvest for wealth management service

Newspaper publisher The Times has teamed up with Best-invest to launch a white-label advised and direct service. Times Wealth Management Services offers investors a choice of transaction-only, advised, discretionary and wealth planning accounts. News UK business development director Neil Martin says it is an “exciting milestone” for The Times. He says: “When it comes to […]


Aegon insurance arm looks set for FCA fine

Aegon subsidiary Stonebridge International Insurance is likely be fined by the Financial Conduct Authority, Money Marketing understands. The general insurance firm has been subject to a Section 166 skilled persons report, which checks for weaknesses or failings in a firm’s practices. The regulator orders these reports where it has concerns and firms have to meet […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    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