View more on these topics

Garry Heath to launch adviser trade body

Former IFA Association director general Garry Heath is to launch a new adviser trade body, Money Marketing can reveal.

The trade body will be open to wealth managers and independent and restricted advisers, and is set to launch next month. 

Heath says there is a “considerable team” behind the organisation.

He says: “We are going to fight advisers’ corner and challenge the status quo.

“We will be asking some serious questions of the regulator and the Government. We plan to get as close as we can to the consumer lobby, as in my experience adviser representation is more effective when we work with consumers.”

Heath says the trade body will initially focus on areas including the switching off of trail commission, and greater Government oversight of the FCA. 

Further details of the organisation are expected at the launch next month.

Heath set up the IFA Association before it became part of what is now Apfa and was director general between 1989 and 1999.

He founded the financial services division of Bipar, the European body which represents IFAs. He has also established and sold two national financial services businesses valued at £40m.

Recommended

Christine Lagarde 2013 700x450.jpg
3

IMF knocks back Greek hopes of loan extension

The International Monetary Fund has rejected requests from Greece to extend the deadlines on loan repayments, according to reports. IMF managing director Christine Lagarde said yesterday that Greek ministers should instead focus on restructuring the debt-ridden nation’s economy rather than seeking an extension, the Wall Street Journal reports. “It’s clearly not a course of action […]

Scorpion-Predatory Arthropod Arachnid-Venom-Sting-700.png
2

Ombudsman backs L&G and Scottish Widows in pension scam complaint

The Pensions Ombudsman has thrown out two complaints made against providers who allowed a member to transfer to a suspected liberation scheme. Joseph Winning filed complaints against Legal & General and Scottish Widows after the firms completed his request to transfer around £50,000 to the Capita Oak Pension Scheme. Winning says the providers failed to […]

Chris-Hannant-glances-from-a-profile-pose-700.jpg
10

Apfa fails to act on FSCS costs after calling for NAO audit

Apfa has failed to submit a request to the National Audit Office to review the costs of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, despite publicly calling for it almost two months ago. In February, Apfa published a press release calling on the NAO to conduct a value for money audit on the FSCS’s strategic projects. The […]

Compliance tip of the week: Vulnerable clients a certainty

It is easy to dismiss the need to deal with vulnerable clients as at the fringes of advice, not something really applicable to you. But with one in five of us likely to develop dementia, and one in four of us suffering from some form of mental illness at any one time, it is inconceivable […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 22 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Excellent news you’ll certainly get my support

  2. E L Wisty (an only twin) 20th April 2015 at 12:49 pm

    Shame that Garry isn’t just going into bat for independent advisers.

  3. Bye Bye APFA. Where do I send my cheque?

  4. Will be interesting. Gill Cardy tried her best at doing something ‘similar’ with IFA Centre.

  5. Sounds good, we need something we can all get behind.

  6. What we need is a Professional Body not a trade body. Something similar to that of the Law Society or BMA. A representative body that the regulator, government and consumer groups will take seriously and implement their recommendations and hopefully someday run scared of.
    We must learn to work as one and close ranks when needed. We also need at all costs to exclude interference from the insurance companies and resist at all costs them trying to buy their way in. Let them stick to the AIB. This is going to be hard and many will try to destroy us, but if stick together and dictate what we want and not what is foisted upon us, then we will win out in the end.

  7. I think there may be many comments on this positive and negative

    I will say; good luck Garry, and to the rest of the team (I cant resist the temptation in saying, you will need it) you will have my support.

    I hope the remit doesn’t end at just asking “serious questions” ? probably APFA’s downfall ?

  8. Gill, God Bless her, tried to fly solo at the wrong time with the wrong message. When we launch on May 15th it will be a team of IFAs with the right message. Those who responded to the Heath Report 2 were asked if they felt a new Trade Association was needed. 90% said yes

  9. The stupidity of the ‘independent’ definition under FCA is that it is causing dissent between advisers.

    Is a whole of market restricted advsier independent? Well he is with regard to the products he advises on.

    Does that make him any less valuable than an IFA? In my view it doesn’t.

    We should accept that the FCA is an equal opportunity abuser, whether you are IFA, WOM, multi-tied or tied they will squeeze every last penny from you with the assistance of their friends at FOS, FSCS, MAS and the Treasury

  10. Let’s go for it ~ provided there are actions to back up the words.

  11. Trevor Harrington 20th April 2015 at 4:13 pm

    Afternoon Garry,
    Count me in please.
    Trevor

  12. E L Wisty (an only twin) 20th April 2015 at 5:25 pm

    I agree that we need to get behind this initiative, as we desperately need a representative body, and Garry is the ideal candidate to head it up.

    However, for it to be effective in getting our message across, there needs to be absolute clarity in respect of who it represents, and clear legitimacy for it to do so.

    Consequently, I fear that a body that represents all types of adviser, rather than just independent advisers and restricted wealth managers (yes, I appreciate that ambiguity is a problem), will be beset with conflicts of interest from outset.

    In addition, while we have the PFS and APFA as well, the FCA will continue its divide and conquer strategy.

    So, short of Garry taking over the PFS and APFA, what’s the next step?

  13. Neil F Liversidge 21st April 2015 at 7:56 am

    Garry – I wish you luck. What you’ll find though is that empty vessels make the most noise. So,Julian, Soren et al: I trust you’ll be paying at least £50pm each to Garry’s new outfit as I pay to APFA. I pay over the odds given the size of my firm but don’t begrudge the extra. I’m sure you’ll now be glad to do the same for Garry so go on boys,set up those standing orders, let’s see some action and cash to back up your words. Garry – here are the excuses you’ll need to get used to: 1. I’m not paying because they’ve never achieved anything. (Untrue when referring to APFA but why spoil a good excuse!) 2. I’ll start paying when they achieve something. (Refer to (1) above.) Both excuses translate as “I’m just too mean to put my hand in my pocket so I’ll have a free ride on those who do pay and in between times I’ll shoot off my mouth on the blogs so that I can feel important and present myself as an advocate for advisers.”

  14. “Back up the words”

    That’ll be the ironic epitaph on APFA’s tombstone

  15. Long time no see, Garry old friend. We all know that the FCA and all its doings amount to an expensive and farcical failure. I am especially fond of the way they launch a review, having decided the outcome in advance. They then pay consultants to do research and produce reports. They then say that the research supports the view they had taken in the first place, even if on closer reading it does no such thing. For example, the original evidence they produced did not support the commission bias theory, but why let the facts get in the way of a good story.

    Your challenge is to figure out what you are for, not what you are against. To succeed, you have to propose an approach to regulation which is comprehensive, thoughtful, and readily understandable by more or less everyone. Can you write such a thing and get a membership behind it?

    I can’t be bothered with Linked in and Facebook, so I can’t contact you direct. But if you’d like to chat, my phone number hasn’t changed.

    Best of luck.

  16. A bit harsh Neil…and unnecessary.

    When have I ever criticised you personally on here? And as any lover of children’s literature would know, Soren Lorenson is a pen name because my job means that I cannot write under my own name as my comments are not representative of my firm.

    So therefore, you can have absolutely no idea whether I use cash to back up my words.

  17. Neil’s reference to empty vessels making the most noise does rather chime with my earlier description of APFA as Harry Potter and The Chamber of Flatulence. Whatever the achievements of Garry’s new trade body turn out to be, they can only be better than those of APFA. Talk ~ APFA’s stock in trade ~ is cheap, not to mention ineffective, and actions speak louder than words.

  18. In reading these posts, the brave words and the occasional backbiting (designed to guard one’s fiefdom?) I can’t help feeling bemused.

    I well recall NAIFA and Gary’s efforts back then. Personally I found them somewhat bellicose and not the sort of representation I was looking for. When this morphed into AIFA under Paul Smee I felt that the more emollient and diplomatic approach suited me better and I willingly put my money where my mouth was and did so ever since.

    However I was never clear what exactly NAIFA achieved for all its bellicosity and why Gary withdrew from the arena. I well remember Gary’s high dudgeon concerning the £10k capital adequacy requirement. I felt this put us in a very poor light. What other business has such a small capital requirement? It was as if we were advertising ourselves as men of straw.

    I also see that there is still confusion between what I think is the false distinction between a trade body and a professional body. We currently have APFA as a trade body and the PFS and the IFP as professional bodies. I never really understood why we have this distinction. The Law Society acts in both capacities – as does the ICAEW.

    To be candid I have long suspected that our bodies are there more for their benefit than for ours. Why burden yourself with all the hoopla of being an IFA when you can run a trade body and probably make as much if not more money?

    As has already been mentioned it is a pity that Gary didn’t take the opportunity of promoting independence (and if appropriate pressing for a rethink of the definitions). However I do understand the reasoning. It will be hard enough to get the financial blood from the adviser stone (whether independent or restricted). I just hope that it will be on an individual subscription basis rather than a corporate one. In truth if I was still authorised I doubt if I would join as I wouldn’t want to be lumped with restricted, networked and tied. (After all that is why I resigned from the board of AIFA).

    In the end though one wonders if this kind of trade body is worthwhile at all. Our Regulator is omnipotent and answerable to no one. If the TSC can’t make headway with them why do we in the business so fondly presume that we can make significant headway? Perhaps we should waste less time shouting and just stick to the day job, which in the end puts the bread on our table.

  19. Neil

    ’empty drums (vessels) make the most noise’. Totally agree – Lots of empty drums in this industry !!!

    Funny then that APFA hasn’t made a hell of a din ?

  20. Neil: you are not out of line. I spent most of the nineties listen to reason why people didn’t want to join and I am sure nothing has changed.

    We will need to concentrate on those who do and when the beast is launched I hope the flood of support I have experienced in the last 24 hours transfers in to memberships.

    HI Harry: In terms of Cap Ad the issue was never the quantum. £10k was pretty meaningless for most it was the principle. Cap Ad is used to assess the strengths of banks not professional firms.
    All the professions use solvency and so should IFAs.

    The danger is that once accepted Banks can lobby for its increase as they did in Sweden where a very healthy IFA sector, much supported by Swedish Consumers, was killed of by the Cap Ad increasing from 10k Euro to 100k Euro in a week.

    More info on May 15th

  21. Does anyone know if Lord Deben actually does anything whatsoever for our cause on behalf of APFA?

  22. @ Harry K – your description of the latter day APFA as ’emollient’ was highly apposite.

    Not sure you intended the outcome though.

Leave a comment