View more on these topics

Editor’s note: Orphaned clients are safe… for now

It’s amazing how strongly the subject of commission still inflames adviser passions.

The debate is obviously far more nuanced than many give it credit for. Legacy pensions flogged only because of the commission they paid can hardly be put in the same ballpark as vital protection products that simply would not be commercially viable to advise on without at least some form of commission. Arguably, some form of trail commission also helps cover the cost of ongoing servicing for historic clients by advisers.

Either way, the exact form commission takes – and how it influences the advice process – still matters.

Recent statistics show that around a quarter of adviser revenue is still a direct result of commission.

We are now two years on from the sunset clause, banning legacy trail payments between fund managers and platforms, and many argue that those reforms are set to contribute to a continuing decline in that number.

That might sound like a good thing, but the issue of clients left orphaned, without their adviser, is an unintended consequence best avoided.

While many focused on the sunset clause’s impact on the relationship between providers and platforms, what drew less attention was that the trail commission tap for advised platform clients was also turned off.

If someone was sold a pension back in the day by an adviser, but has little other need for planning, that trail may be the only thing keeping them tied to the adviser.

Cast adrift: Two years on, has the sunset clause left clients orphaned?

Commercially, it would look like it makes sense to drop many lower value, less complex clients because of the fact they are unengaged and not in need of the service moving to an advice fee would warrant.

Direct to consumer options might sound palatable for some of these, but they certainly won’t be suitable for a lot of them.

And how much of trail is really coming from this kind of inactive business?

As our cover story this week suggests, it does not appear that huge swathes of orphaned clients have arisen as a result of the sunset clause.

There is another key reason for why that is: if a client invested in a fund before the RDR, advisers can still receive trail commission from it.

The FCA consulted on whether it could also turn this stream off as part of its recent asset management market study.

Fortunately, it has decided to continue reviewing the situation, with “no immediate plans” to change its policy.

If such a move did end up going ahead, you might see that orphaned client issue really rear its ugly head.


Where was the big bang on orphan clients?

Platforms have downplayed the impact of the sunset clause on the scale of orphan client numbers on their books but experts warn reported figures may not tell the whole story. The sunset clause came into effect in April resulting in trail commission for advised platform business being switched off. The change followed the FCA’s ban on […]


Network launches telephone advice service for orphan clients

Advice network pi financial has launched a centralised telephone advice service for up to 70,000 orphan clients. The network, which has 107 advisers and 14,000 active clients, says it has 70,000 clients without an ongoing service agreement with their adviser. It says these clients have been orphaned as a result of the RDR and the […]

FCA logo new 620x430.jpg

Robos under fire over suitability and disclosure failings

Robo firms’ shortcomings around suitability, fee disclosure and identifying vulnerable clients have been highlighted in findings from an FCA review today. The regulator reviewed seven firms offering online discretionary investment management services and three firms giving automated advice. The FCA says service and fee-related disclosures at most online discretionary investment management firms in its sample […]

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 […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. But it will be providers that eventually kill off historic trail by “removing” this as they “update” their systems, with interesting dialogue on who owns the customer and thus benefits from non-payment of trail. It can’t be the customer – providers systems can’t cope with amending legacy product terms!

  2. Jackie is right…Standard Life have already done this! Justified as being in the spirit of RDR. Still in the battle between David and Goliath I would ask you to reflect on who won!

Leave a comment