So the Institute of Financial Planning believes Sandler's review approach is much more sensible than the plan in the FSA's CP121.
Nick Cann says that no product sale, no fee would put too much pressure on advisers to sell products.
When is anybody going to realise that there are only two reasons that preference is being given to fee-charging:
The ability to charge somebody for your time, regardless of your ability to explain products correctly to clients.
The ability to hide behind the so-called professional image of “not being paid commission”.
If the adviser believes the commission payments are too high he can rebate the “excess” to the client's product. If he cannot make a living from commission, is it the commission or the adviser's ability which is at fault?
Having just celebrated my 42nd anniversary running a one-man IFA practice, I believe the adviser's lack of ability is to blame. Why subsidise inferior advisers by allowing them to charge lapse-proof fees?
Let us start putting the client first – after all, we would all object if we had to pay just to walk into a shop to browse.