Nothing that Nick Bamford said in his recent letter to Money Marketing changes my view, so we will have to beg to differ on this one.
When the FPC examin-ations were introduced, like most advisers, I was happy to obtain the qualifications required at the time. It was under-stood from then on that regulated continued professional development was going to be required.
This presented no problem because right throughout my career in financial services, going back to 1964, I have kept myself up to date with knowledge.
There was no suggestion that in due course the goalposts were going to be moved and further formal qualifications would be required to stay in business.
Having achieved the necessary qualification (on paper) and working a regular 60-hour week, I was happy to spend my leisure time with my family and friends and had no particular desire after a day’s work to do anything else and certainly not to sit further exams.
Nick, I appreciate that some people enjoy exams but by the time you qualify for a bus pass, you have to understand that formal exams pose considerable stress which, while toler- able and even beneficial when you are younger, becomes intolerable and detrimental with the passage of time.
I understand that those with more certificates might resent grandfathering but I would suggest that it is grossly unkind to impose unnecessary stress in this manner.
If all this goes through without amendment, it will certainly drive away a very big number of older advisers.
We can all see through the lobby against grandfathering because in reality there lies an agenda – fewer advisers equals more cake for those remaining. There you go, Nick, I have just read your mind.
Barry Johnson Financial Services