View more on these topics

Apfa: Holding the FCA to account on adviser numbers

Data is important. Produced clearly, accurately and consistently, it allows policymakers to better understand the impact of their decisions upon the people and markets affected. It also enables those within the industry to conduct their own investigations in order to more effectively hold the Government and regulator to account.

This is why, in the wake of the RDR, we have produced our Financial Adviser Market: In Numbers report on an annual basis. The report brings together data to present a snapshot of the adviser market at the end of each year.

Used by both policymakers and the broader financial services sector, the publication provides useful insight into trends and developments in the UK advice market. It helped us see the extent of the decline in adviser numbers post-RDR and highlighted the amount of profit taken out of the industry in 2015 as a result of that year’s sharp increase in Financial Services Compensation Scheme levies.

We usually produce our report in April and have started to collate the data that will tell us the story of 2016. However, this year, for the first time, the FCA originally told us it will not provide us with the relevant data from the Retail Mediation Activities Return. Instead, it will be building upon previous figures published in its data bulletins and will produce this information in May.

We are concerned by this development. The data bulletins produced by the FCA to date have been ad hoc publications on its specific choice of topics over specific time periods.

Figures produced on the retail intermediary sector so far have not been comparable with those we have requested and published in our adviser market report, as the categorisation is different.

Our interest is particularly in the business activities of those firms which conduct financial advice as their main regulated activity. However, the data the FCA has produced so far looks at revenue for different types of business conducted by all retail intermediary firms that undertook these specific activities.

While there is merit in producing data on a particular hot topic issue when stakeholder interest is high, such inconsistent snapshots of the market is not the same thing as having a regular series of key indicators.

It is easy to use statistics to present a misleading picture to suit a particular policy or political agenda, often through simply choosing certain start and end dates to the time period they cover.

The best way to present an unvarnished view of the data is to publish a  series where the data points are at regular intervals, such as that the FCA has previously provided us with as at 31 December. This is what the Government statistics service does.

We submitted a Freedom of Information request to the FCA for figures that are consistent and comparable. Since submitting our request, the regulator has agreed to release the data. We welcome this decision and will use the data to shed light upon developments in the size and nature of the UK financial advice market in 2016.  Our report will be published in the next few months and shared with policymakers and the wider advice community.

Far from being a niche concern, we believe there is a clear public policy interest in publishing regular data on the advice market. The popularity of our adviser market report with policymakers and others in the industry demonstrates a significant appetite to better understand the impact of regulation in order to hold the FCA and the Government to account.

Caroline Escott is senior policy adviser at Apfa

Recommended

FCA logo new 3 620x430
7

FCA data suggests over 80% of advice firms are IFAs

Independent advisers account for 84 per cent of advice firms operating in the market, the latest FCA data suggests. The figures were obtained by BBC Money Box’s Paul Lewis, and passed to Money Marketing. The full data will be published by the regulator later this year. Based on regulatory returns data for 2016, a total […]

UK housebuilders remain a value trap – despite post-Brexit falls

Despite the sharp drop in housebuilders following the Brexit result, valuations in the highly illiquid market are still at elevated levels. And whilst some investors may take comfort from superficially low price/earnings multiples, are earnings sustainable over the long term, asks Holly Cassell, Assistant Manager of the Neptune UK Mid Cap Fund. Click here to […]

Time to stop the salami slicing on tax relief

Steve Webb  – Director of Policy and External Communications As the Autumn Statement approaches, Steve Webb calls for the Government to stop tinkering with tax relief. Twice a year, in the run-up to the Spring Budget and the Autumn Statement, we face a torrent of speculation as to what changes the Chancellor might make to […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 9 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Sorry APFA …
    The main objective of the RDR was to reduce adviser numbers …. it was a total success!

    Many were told at the time ….. no-one listened

    The rest of what came out of Canary Wharf was propergander pure and simple, oh I can hear it all now, better qualifications, no commission, professionalism…… blah blah blah blah
    Everyone’s heads were so stuck up some one else’s back sides ( APFA included) we have ended up with …… a raft of major problems probably worse (for the clients) than we were before ?

    Cost, non advice, reduction in supply, confusions, gaps every where, and worsted of all an industry that hates, miss trusts, and has lost all respect in a failed regulator …… I would wager this feeling is mutual ?

  2. Julian Stevens 5th April 2017 at 4:57 pm

    So what?

  3. No surprises here then, as I doubt very much that anyone in the FCA ever looks at the RMAR data, and probably doesn’t have a clue what to do with the swathes of data it collects. Not to mention the time and effort every firm has to make every time it makes these patently useless returns.

  4. Interesting is as interesting does. So when I saw a guy on Monday at my regular, pro bono CAB clinic who has just lost £75k via an unauthorised adviser and South American teak opportunity, who actually cares about the stat’s? This was all the money he had in the world.

    As luck [sic] would have it the SIPP provider whose name generally means freedom, is regulated so maybe a FOS claim might be successful. What a state of affairs however.

  5. “Data is important. Produced clearly, accurately and consistently…”

    Absolutely right. But just talking about ‘advisers’ as a homogeneous group is both misleading and inaccurate.

    There are Independent Advisers, Restricted Advisers, Company Representatives. Employed, Self Employed. Large firms and small firms. When you have this data and compare it to previous statistics, you may actually end up with some worthwhile information.

  6. Is any data gathered on the number of paraplanners within the industry? The industry could/can cope with less advisers if there are more paraplanners, so whilst looking at adviser numbers is useful it’s not the full picture.

  7. Julian Stevens 3rd June 2017 at 2:47 pm

    Given that APFA has no power to compel the FCA to modify its approach to anything or to refer its findings to another body which may be thus empowered (the TSC has none), just what is meant by holding it to account? APFA may cajole, lobby, beseech or even beg but, when all is said and done, the regulator is under no obligation to take a scrap of notice. So, for the most part, it simply doesn’t.

Leave a comment