Not requiring advisers to specify level of qualification or professional standing on its directory reflects poorly on the FCA, say the Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment and the Chartered Banker Institute.
The professional bodies joined together to create an alternative directory two years ago after speaking out against the FCA’s plans to scrap its directory.
Now, the two say the watchdog’s Friday announcement that it will require advisers to list their professional standings publicly will only be relevant with more specificity.
CBI chief executive Simon Thompson says public confidence will be at risk if the directory is not changed to accommodate further details.
“Being a member of a chartered professional body is an achievement satisfying ongoing personal commitment to high levels of knowledge, skills and behaviours that go beyond the minimum standards required by regulators.”
Both bodies disagree with the FCA’s argument that the reason they did not list specifics was that there were too many variable levels of membership within the six accredited bodies.
“Specifying level of membership is a good proxy for the individual’s level of standing and experience in the sector,” Thompson adds.
CISI chief executive Simon Culhane says six bodies should not be too much work for the FCA to standardise.
“If global airlines alliances such as “One World” can agree common terminology amongst all their different membership levels, it should be quite possible for the FCA to facilitate a similar common standard from just six UK based bodies.”