View more on these topics

Ex-trade body chief to measure RDR impact on consumers

A study which aims to assess the full impact on consumers of the RDR has been launched by Garry Heath, the former IFA Association director general. Heath is in discussions with members of the Treasury select committee about how the results of the survey can be used to hold the regulator to account.

The survey will ask advisers how many clients they service and in what way, both now and before the RDR; how dependent their business is on trail commission; and what impact the April 2016 platform rebates ban on legacy business will have on their clients.

Heath hopes to gain 500 adviser responses, as well as a number of in-depth case studies, and will publish the report in October.

He says robust figures are needed on the number of clients that have been disenfranchised as a result of the RDR, and the capacity of the advice market to meet consumer demand. He says: “This report will create a base from which to assess what the RDR has done for consumers and whether they have suffered detriment.”


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 7 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Garry happy to contribute to the study. Please post details of where to respond.

  2. Might I suggest that if this is to gain any traction then the quid pro quo is that clients should be informed annually in writing how much has been paid in ‘trail’ and if they are not happy for this to continue they should have the opportunity to have it stopped – and that the provider pays the benefit directly into the policy – either as additional units or a reduction in premium.

    Then we may possibly get everyone on board. The ‘big thing’ that the Regulator has (in my view) is that clients know little or nothing about what is being paid to their advisers and advisers are (shall we say) being a little coy in being transparent.

  3. This is a commendable but a futile exercise. They already know what a co*k up the RDR has been and they know that no one can actually hold them to account. Just wait to see the outcome of the enquiry into the Clive Adamson faux pas and you will see just how unaccountable they actually are. If by chance they pay it any lip service at all I will be surprised. That said when they get quizzed about the disastrous effects of RDR on the public they will go away and do a survey to find how “effective it has been” and then no more will be said about it. The FCA simply will not admit they made a catastrophic mistake with a lot of RDR. Its not what a regulator does. Still if it can make them squirm for a while it will be nice to watch on parliament TV I guess.

  4. Firstly the place to see is


    I have had some VERY interesting chats with Parliamentarian recently some of whom would love to organise some ceremonial squirming for the architects and the creators of this mess.

    But I need numbers to help. Both from current IFAs and those who have already exited.

    One other point. This not about reverting back to a previous status quo .

    This is about redefining the relationship between the regulated and regulator. A number of IFAs have realised, reinforced by a regulatory imperative, a case can be made for fees based advice to a subset of clients and that a more profitable business may result.

    That was always the case and was always a commercial option. But if the regulator is free to attack anywhere in the client/advisers relationship How long will it be before advisers are forced to reorganise yet again for the amusement of a FCA social engineer.

    Remember it wasn’t long ago that the regulator was pushing IFAs towards trail

    Maximum effort Mes Braves – we can make a difference


  5. Steven Farrall 6th June 2014 at 4:08 pm

    ‘Regulationism’ replaced socialism – as a centrally planned economic system – when the Berlin Wall fell down. Once you have every area of society regulated and subject to arbitrary interventions by capricious and utterly unaccountable functionaries you are back to be being behind the Berlin Wall. What we are attacking here is only our little corner of this system and its destruction of our liberty and responsibility. If Garry is successful then it may see the whole rotten system of deceit under attack. It is about time that the self serving arrogant and ignorant functionaries were deprived of their tax consuming wealth destroying sinecures and entitlements and made to get a proper, productive, job.

  6. Julian Stevens 9th June 2014 at 10:16 am

    Engaging directly with members of the TSC can only be better than APFA’s approach of calling on the FCA to review the RDR or indeed anything else, though the fundamental ~ and it is fundamental ~ problem remains that the FCA is barely more accountable to the TSC than is to APFA or any other body.

    What can the TSC actually do if it does agree that, as a result of the FSA having endlessly embellished it since it got the green light all those years ago, much of the RDR has caused more detriment than benefits and that much of is of little interest or practical value to consumers?

    In March 2011, it was put to Hector Sants that the FSA should consider deferring its proposed red button day for implementation of its RDR. Sants undertook to do so but then, upon returning to his office, without a moment’s delay swiftly dashed off a letter to Andrew Tyrie saying the date would stand. Andrew Tyrie wrote back objecting to the impudent haste of Sants’ response. Sants wrote back saying basically Yeah, well, next time we’ll give it a week before responding.

    Fast forward three years to March 2014 to when it was put to Martin Wheatley’s that there’s a strong moral argument for intermediaries to be reimbursed the £118m we were overcharged by the FSA and, despite his claim that the FCA is “a very different animal from the FSA”, he didn’t even bother waiting until he got back to his office before issuing his response. He just said No to Andrew Tyrie on the spot and that was that.

    Having managed to gain access to the TSC, Garry Heath should be pressing for the creation of a Statutory Independent Regulatory Oversight Committee with unassailable powers to force the FCA to take note of its recommendations and force them to implement those recommendations. Anything less is just talk.

  7. @ Julian

    Re- £118 million; it will be interesting how much the likes of Wheatley and his, cohorts pay themselves (salary bonuses, and benefits) this year ?

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