Thank you Lorna Bourke for your assessment (Money Marketing, March 28) of what might be the real reason behind CP121, namely a desire by the FSA to, in effect, cut down the number of small independent IFA firms in the UK and thus simplify the FSA's burden of regulatory supervision.
IFA firms should note that the FSA is already on record as saying that a lack of response from the IFA sector will be taken as a tacit acceptance of the CP121 proposals.
Every IFA firm should be preparing a reasoned response to submit to the FSA. Don't leave it to someone else -do it now.
There is no shortage now of comment in Money Marketing and you need to consider carefully how CP121 will affect your own business and your existing client base.
While you are in letter-writing mode, perhaps you should also consider penning a letter to your favourite pension company to express your concerns about the spread of the 1 per cent charge to other more complex pension products that require more advice and expertise than a simple stakeholder pension – and to your favourite with-profits provider to ask why they are not being more proactive in publicly defending the with-profits concept?
The IFA community has its back to the wall as never before and needs to be proactive to ensure that the current concerns are well voiced.
Name and address supplied