View more on these topics

Paul Lewis: Advisers and financial journalists are one and the same

Advisers and financial journalists must support each other more in our different roles. After all, we both exist for the same reason

Why do financial journalists exist? I am sure that it is a question many IFAs ask, especially when they read things they think are wrong, dangerous or fail to end with “find a good, qualified financial adviser”.

I hate to say it but we exist for the same reason you do: we make our living explaining the complex world of finance and advising people what to do.

I learned my skills decades ago explaining the complexities of tax, benefits, mortgages, investments and so on to a readership which could not afford to pay for an accountant or adviser.

Not that there were any back then. The man from the Pru was the closest most people got and, of course, if you were rich, there were stockbrokers – the people who invest your money until it is all gone.

But that was about it. This was the 1970s, before advisers had been invented.

Paul Lewis: ‘I would never recommend a restricted adviser’

On 20 November 1973, the first comprehensive guides on money matters for pensioners were published by Age Concern. I was one of the people responsible for that revolution.

Your Rights explained the state pension as it was transformed by Labour’s Barbara Castle into a complex earnings-related benefit, and the special tax allowances for pensioners, married couples and people with children. Then there were new disability benefits and war pensions. Explaining, clarifying and, yes, advising became my speciality.

In the 1970s, The Times had a half-page Saturday finance column, mainly about investments and shares. Tax, benefits, fees and mortgages – personal finance – did not feature often. But they did by the 1980s, which is when I gave up my job and began writing for newspapers and magazines.

It was 1986. Nigella Lawson’s dad was chancellor and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had not yet been ousted by the men in grey suits. Over the next two years, they created the personal pension, with a big bribe from diverted tax and National Insurance. Then they created the financial services industry.

It got to work at once sending teams of poorly trained, commission-driven sales staff to descend on a hapless population who believed government TV adverts about throwing off their chains and were willingly missold £11bn worth of personal pensions.

A decade later, the industry had to spend £2.5bn finding two million people to repay the £11bn they should never have put into their pension pot in the first place.

It took financial journalists a little while to realise the con that this was. Then the Big Bang, the demutualisation of building societies and the start of regulation overlaid with complex tax changes created fertile ground for a new form of personal finance journalism. Often sceptical, sometimes not enough, it reported on the new industry and advised readers on the growing financial complexification.

Paul Lewis: The end of advice as most know it

Another new profession was born at that time: the financial adviser, tied or independent. Financial journalists quickly learned the former was bad and the latter good.

There was, however, a cancer at the heart of this new industry. Commission. The financial interest of advisers was to sell us stuff, and the riskiest stuff usually generated the most commission.

In that quarter century, share prices rose on average by 12 per cent a year, so commission and high charges could be snaffled from clients’ money without them caring or even noticing through the fog that hid the details, which is still to fully clear.

Thirty years on, we are back where we started. Commission-driven sales people – the introducers – and some advisers are embroiled in the familiar conflict of interest caused by charging a fee contingent on recommending people to transfer a guaranteed pension for life into one subject to the vagaries of the stock market. That is if they are lucky. Eco-apartments in Costa Rica planted with sustainable trees are very popular, I believe.

Paul Lewis: Investing in gold

FCA research on pension transfers found only a quarter of the products recommended by the 88 firms it went to see were suitable. A third were unsuitable. It found less than half the advice to transfer was appropriate.

The regulator is considering banning contingent charging “given the potential harm to consumers” by this “irreversible decision”. It has restated its view that “in most cases… the right outcome will be for the customer… not to transfer”.

It was this conflict of interest which led to the FCA banning commission on pension deals in 2012. Six years on, conflicts of interest are back big time.

Nic Cicutti: Why can’t advisers get it right with millennials?

It is up to us journalists to warn people of the dangers of leaving good final salary schemes. And, of course, up to the good IFAs – like the ones who went to Port Talbot to give pro bono advice to steelworkers, ripe for bamboozling with the promise of sums worth more than their house. Many of them are now claiming from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. The cost of that is being paid by the good advisers – the ones who read Money Marketing.

I spend my time explaining things and advising people. Claim marriage allowance – up to £900 backdated; flight delay compensation – up to £520 per passenger; power of attorney refunds – £316 per couple. Kerching, kerching, kerching. I also warn them about expensive mistakes, frauds and investments more dangerous than a fixed odds betting terminal.

Advisers and financial journalists inhabit the same world and we should be supporting each other in our different roles. I recommend people seek good, independent financial advice. It is about time advisers recommended people read good, independent financial journalism as well.

Paul Lewis is a freelance journalist and presenter of BBC Radio 4’s ‘Money Box’ programmeYou can follow him on Twitter @paullewismoney



Paul Lewis: FSCS funding row misses crucial point

The wrong people are paying the levy and the fund is not going to enough of the right consumers Consumers of financial services firms are not being given enough compensation when they are missold, misadvised or out-and-out cheated. Or, rather, not enough clients are being given compensation. We know that because, in most cases, they […]


Advisers dominate latest FSCS default list

The Financial Services Compensation Scheme declared eight firms in default in May, including advice firms from Wales, Yorkshire and the Midlands. The firms on the list include Welsh adviser Grosvenor Butterworth, West Midlands advisers Lifeboat Financial Advisers and Platinum Independent Advisers and London-based Argent Personal Finance Managers. Also on the list are Yorkshire firms Alliance […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 10 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I wish I was as brilliant as Mr Lewis.

  2. I wish we didn’t have the same never ending liabilities on any ‘advice’ we give that Mr Lewis doesn’t have, because we are basically doing the same job.

    Remind me again of how many exams you have to pass to be able to give the ‘advice’ you do and how much time you have to spend ‘continually developing’ your knowledge? And exactly how much of your ‘commission’ do you pay each year to cover the FSCS bill?

    Personally I always recommend people talk to my mate Dave down the pub, he reads the papers and knows plenty about the world of finance, so is as qualified as Paul.

  3. Your article describes the evolution of the adviser in a way which entirely contradicts your headline that good advisers should recommend good financial have described things in a way which a good financial journalist would not do.

  4. Unfortunately many people take advice from unqualified barrack room lawyers like this as they seem plausible on the ‘little knowledge is dangerous’ types. has there ever been an individual with a higher opinion of himself as this. Complete clown.

  5. “It is about time advisers recommended people read good, independent financial journalism as well”

    What? Good independent financial journalism maybe, but not the unqualified drivel you spew out. Never could understand how a psychologist reckons he has the qualifications to advise people on financial matter.

    • I think your issue is more to do with humility than psychology, and nothing to do with qualifications in any subject. Mrs Smith would likely take considerable exception to your view of her profession.

  6. I understand where you are coming from and I also understand the bile of these posts.

    However I guess you do serve a useful role in publicising financial matters to a mass audience in the hope that some readers may get engaged.

    But I fear that your audience may, by and large, be removed from ours. Our clientele are more likely to read the FT and are already very well aware of the advantages that a decent adviser can bring.

  7. “I spend my time explaining things and advising people….”

    Explaining things is good, as long as its done in an unbiased way.

    But advising people requires a detailed knowledge of a persons circumstances, requirements and objectives, and as such is always unique to an individual client.

    Mixing explanation and advice when you don’t have the detailed knowledge of an individual essentially means you’re providing unreliable advice.

  8. Same Paul Lewis, mixing up individual tailored financial advice for clients with his warnings and information about tax reclaims or whatever he’s wittering about this week.
    Paul you’re not and probably never will be qualified to provide ‘financial advice’.
    You get on with your consumer affairs stuff and leave us alone to provide regulated, accountable financial advice

  9. Paul, I completely disagree, we are in fact total opposites. You write as well as broadcast about financial tips which are generic and not specific.

    I, as most other planners do, listen to our clients and understand without judgement what it is that is important for them to achieve in life. Our advice and planning is then tailored specifically towards that individual.

    It is a shame that your view of a financial adviser/planner is so narrow.

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm