For keen readers of these pages, you may have noticed a number of prominent financial planners taking on the subject of chartered status in recent weeks.
They have chosen to do so with the space offered to them. But I do think this reflects an undercurrent I hear in the market that now is the time to start asking some questions about what it means to be chartered today.
There is obviously still the problem of policing the title, with Unbiased and VouchedFor listings containing a significant number of non-chartered individuals and firms claiming to be so.
I would feel aggrieved if I had put as much effort in as those that honestly hold the award, only to see others who have not gone through the same process claiming to be at the same level.
This comes back to a core point that chartered needs to say something over and above a standard financial planner.
According to data from recruitment consultants BWD, around 40 per cent of financial advisers that take part in its census each year have chartered status.
However, when combined with those saying that they expect to attain it in the coming two years, the balance could soon tip to a situation where the majority of planners will be chartered.
Will chartered still hold a special significance if that is the case? One could argue that the closer the number gets to 100 per cent, the less the title means. Or you could argue that an all-chartered advice sector would be a significantly more professional one; though the increase in charges that evidence shows comes with the title might not be such a great thing for access to advice.
I think that as public knowledge of financial advice continues improving, the chartered designation will become a greater influencing factor on client decisions.
However, the tightening of criteria to claim chartered firm status as opposed to chartered individual is probably not all that important.
For all that some firms claim their clients love dealing with the wider business, rather than just one individual, it is clear the core relationship remains with the lead advisers.
Should a business have to explain that, under the new rules, they are technically not a chartered firm anymore, but that the client’s adviser is still chartered, I doubt many would bat an eyelid.
But tell them that their adviser has not, in fact, ticked all the boxes they should have to claim chartered qualifications and it might be a different story.
Justin Cash is editor of Money Marketing. Follow him on Twitter @Justin_Cash_1