View more on these topics

Déjà-vu all over again

I have been having some weird dreams. Some of them involve a much younger me taking part in activities that are clearly linked to events from many years ago, like clubbing to acid house music or Ipswich Town winning the FA Cup.

What worries me is that, increasingly, I can’t quite make out whether I am wide awake or still dreaming.

Last week, for example, there was a news item to the effect that Lloyds Banking Group is to sell its 218-strong Halifax estate agency chain for £1. Lloyds said a strategic review had “concluded that an estate agency operation is no longer integral to its business model”.

Bizarrely, 15 years ago, Nationwide Building Society sold its 300-strong chain of agents to Hambro Countrywide for £1. Nationwide chief executive Brian Davis said back then: “We will now be able to concentrate more effectively on our core financial services business.”

Spooky or what? Still, at least Lloyds Banking Group managed to get about 45 per cent more for its chain, on a branch-by-branch basis, than Nationwide, although presumably inflation swallows most of those “gains” up.

In another recent dream, I was sitting opposite Godfrey Jillings, chief executive of the old IFA regulator Fimbra, as he and his PR spokesman John “Tory Boy” Pinnegar explained to me why I needed to pass my Financial Advisers’ Competence Test.

From memory, Fact was introduced at the beginning of 1993 and was the first tentative step taken by Fimbra to improve the training and competence of IFAs – although why, in my dream, I needed to take that exam is unclear.

At the time, Jillings told us the initial standard of Fact was much lower than he considered necessary – not surprising really, given that this exam was so excruciatingly basic it did not even count, on its own, as academically equivalent to the now-discredited Financial Planning Certificate.

Fimbra linked its exams to a continuing professional education scheme, whereby each RI was required to devise a personal programme involving at least 50 hours of study a year. This self-certified CPE scheme included reading trade newspapers such as Money Marketing.

While not exactly an onerous requirement, many IFAs were vocal in their objections. I recall writing articles in Money Marketing on the subject. A steady procession of IFAs came forward, all opposed the need for professional qualifications, especially as they were by now in the 50s and could not spare the time to study and pass exams. Surely, the fact they all had scores of happy clients meant they should be spared from this new obligation?

So it was with a strange feeling of dreaming with my eyes open that I read a letter in Money Marketing last week from 56-year-old Jeremy Newbegin, a director of The Ethical Partnership in Southampton, who lamented: “When am I supposed to find the time to study? I am not an 18-year-old in a part-time job with plenty of time on my hands. I have been in the industry since 1979. I have been a director of this company since 2001 and I look after over 300 clients. In addition, I have normal director responsibilities, I am the compliance overseer for the company, in charge of our TCF policy and manage our administrator.

“To throw a wall in front of people so close to retirement is an injustice. I deserve to be treated better and with more respect,” an argument somewhat devalued by the fact that, as he confessed, the collapse in value of his pension fund means he will be working until he is 70, or 14 years from now.

An even stranger sense of – Déjà-vu or was I dreaming again? – came last week in another item in Money Marketing, this time by my old sparring partner Alan Lakey.

He announced the birth of a new body, the Adviser Alliance, which promises to fight on behalf of IFAs, “with an aim of bringing about regulatory change and a more balanced advisory world”.

Clearly, the continuous frothings of Alan’s former stablemate Evan Owen are not deemed suitable in the new age we find ourselves in, hence the need for a lobbying organisation that sits, on a “rant scale”, somewhere between the IFA Defence Union and Aifa.

Or, as one IFA gleefully referred to it last week in a reference to the 1990s’ IFA trade body once led by the redoubtable Garry Heath, we are seeing the formation of “Nfifa Lite”.

Will the new Adviser Alliance succeed in building a bloc of militant IFAs willing to join battle against overbearing regulation? I don’t know but what is interesting is the battleground it is already staking out. In his first article as a putative leader of “Nfifa Lite”, Alan has identified a vital issue to discuss and, indirectly, to defend – IFA commission.

How very 1990s. Zzzzzzz…

Nic Cicutti can be contacted at


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 9 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. The voice of Nic Cicutti past 23rd October 2009 at 3:42 pm

    The voice of Nic Cicutti past

    Still playing Déjà-vu, wind-up journalism Nic rather than hitting the real issues?

    How very 2009 Zzzzzzz…

  2. The highest scaling ranter in the pinks – My mate Nic, keep it up my mate, what the BBC did for the BNP you can do for everyone who gets up your nose. Assuming anyone, apart from me, reads your incessant babblings.

    Kind regards

    PFJ, or is it JPF?

  3. What would you have to say if your governing body suddenly announced you could no longer practise as a journalist until you gained a higher qualification? Come on nic be honest in the old days what qualification did a journalist require?

  4. I’ve been a journalist for 20 years and already have a post-graduate diploma in journalism (one-year full time course culminating in 6 three-hour exams), as well as the industry-standard NCTJ exam (four 3-hour exams), not to mention a two-and-a-half year apprenticeship (so-called “indentures”) on a local paper before I could call myself a qualified reporter.

    But if I had to obtain higher qualifications, I would – without whingeing about it.

  5. “an argument somewhat devalued by the fact that, as he confessed, the collapse in value of his pension fund means he will be working until he is 70, or 14 years from now.”

    Why is my argument devauled because my pension pot is not large enough for me to retire Nic? I don’t where you have been for the last twelve years but the FTSE100 is at the same level today that it was 1997.

    As for you taking exams now if you had to so I will also but again that was not my point. I question why a thirty year old experienced adviser now has to take more exams without that experince being taken into account. I would also suggest Nic that it is likely that my workload is far reaching in terms of my responsibilities and workload. I’m only guessing of course.

  6. Jeremy, yes you are indeed guessing.

    Good to know that you will be taking these exams after all…

  7. Bearing in mind a large part of your own website makes reference to financial issues which are out of date and you advertise “money coaching” which is an unregulated activity, but I assume you charge for it and would try and rely on a timebar or longstop should s stale complaint arise. I just wonder if you would be willing to PUBLICLY waive your own rights to ANY timebar or longstop so that when you retire you have to defend yourself until the day you die as IFAs are being told they must (and then your estate has to do the same thing if you are dead).
    If you are not willing to, then you remain a hypocrite.
    I have posted anon here, but if you want to publicly waive your legal rights, then I will remove my anonymoty.
    And yes I can’t spell, but you get my meaning……

  8. So a few of the external links I’ve supplied are dead, oh deary me, slapped wrist. On the substantive issue, I cannot for the life of me imagine why anyone would want to sue me for helping them to cut their credit card bills, if that’s why they came to me for, or telling them they can spend their money more effectively by shopping around for a better-value power supplier, or suggesting to them that – judging by the pension assets they currently have and expect to have in future – they are likely to be under-provided in terms of retirement income and need to speak to an IFA. If people wanted to sue me for that in 25 years’ time, well, let them. My question to you is: forget the spelling, is that really the best you can do in terms of an argument? No wonder you remain anonymous…

  9. Are you waiving your rights to a longstop then Mr C publicly.
    You say let them sue you after 25 years if they like, but they can’t after more than 15 years, that is the point.
    are you waiving your rights, yes or no?

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