View more on these topics

FCA wants to extend adviser complaints reporting rules

Accounts-Paperwork-Financial-Corporate-Business-700x450.jpg

The FCA plans to extend its rules on complaints reporting to ensure advisers who recommend securities and derivatives meet the same reporting standards as retail investment advisers.

The FSA brought in rules under the RDR in November 2011 which require firms to report complaints related to retail investment activities carried out by retail investment advisers.

Firms have to submit a complaints report to the FCA every six months, even if they have had no complaints, and notify the regulator where an adviser has three upheld complaints within a year or one complaint paying more than £50,000 redress.

But a review of adviser research carried out by the regulator last year has found some firms had interpreted the rules to exclude certain activities carried out by their advisers, so were not reporting complaints arising from advice on shares and derivatives.

The FCA plans to amend its complaint reporting rules so that they cover all activities carried out by retail investment advisers.

The regulator says it is increasingly relying on more data to intervene earlier and make “quicker, bolder decisions”. Complaints reporting data will be used to monitor individual advisers at the point they gain regulatory approval, when advisers move to new firms and an ongoing basis.

The FCA says: “Adjusting the rules to refer to activities carried out when acting as a retail investment adviser will align the scope of all the RDR professionalism rules to the same individuals and the activities they carry out.

“This will ensure advisers are subject to the same standards and scrutiny, for example, if they advise on collective investment schemes or on shares or derivatives.

“We are concerned if we do not make the proposed adjustment, poor quality advisers that specialise in shares or derivatives for example could fall under our radar and the clients of these advisers could suffer.”

Recommended

2

Chris Gilchrist: What is your investment philosophy?

Investment selection should not be about the nuts and bolts of funds or managers. It has to start with the adviser firm’s clearly stated beliefs about investment. Some use the grander words ‘investment philosophy’, but as a philosophy graduate I worry that this is a contradiction in terms.  Do you believe the markets are efficient? […]

M&G Episode Balanced swaps strategic bonds for convertibles fund

M&G’s Juan Nevado and Tony Finding have sold out of their position in the M&G Optimal Income fund to add exposure to Portuguese government bonds and convertibles. The managers disposed of the £335m M&G Episode Balanced fund’s holding in Richard Woolnough’s £15.6bn strategic bond fund in May, selling their 3.5 per cent allocation to the portfolio to […]

Friends Life appoints UK and international chief exec

Friends Life has appointed the chief executive its international arm John Van Der Wielen as chief executive of the insurer’s UK and international divisions. Van Der Wielen will replace UK chief executive David Hynam who has decided to leave the business just seven months after he was appointed to the UK chief executive role as […]

Converting pension savings to a retirement income…

Since last year’s reforms to pension legislation, a significant number of retirees have chosen income drawdown over purchasing an annuity. Income drawdown is more flexible than an annuity. However, it also increases the likelihood that individuals won’t be able to maintain their income throughout their lifetime. In this short video, we explain the risks that […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Julian Stevens 4th July 2013 at 3:40 pm

    Less complaints leading to more stringent and intrusive reporting requirements ~ classic FSA logic. The lower the risk you present the more data we’ll demand (under pain of confiscation of livelihood if you don’t comply).

    Errr, somehow that doesn’t seem quite to chime with what the foreword to the Statutory Code of Practice for Regulators says its creators want to see.

    Still, never mind any of that ~ we have carte blanche to do whatever we want and there’s nobody to stop us. Who gives a toss about the Code? Certainly we don’t have to. But we aren’t an aggressive regulator. No really, we’re not. We just don’t like people getting uppity about what we do and how we do it (or don’t, as the case may be).

Leave a comment