View more on these topics

Letter to the editor: Cap ad rules should be seen as a positive

While I have a smidgen of sympathy with the industry over implementation of the latest capital adequacy rules, I think the proposals are a very sensible idea and should have been introduced years ago.

We are meant to be a professional industry and, to be frank, if the person/firm who is advising us on how to invest our £1m hasn’t a penny to his name, what sort of impression does that give?

The requirement that a business has the equivalent of one quarter’s expenses as a permanent reserve is hardly onerous and is prudent business practice anyway. Thinking about it, the ‘investment’ a client makes is within us and the service our firms are providing so he doesn’t want to be engaged with a fly-by-night entity that hasn’t a couple of pennies to rub together and could evaporate with the wind, does he? 

He wants to invest in a  relationship and to know that it is likely to endure the odd rough knock in economic or business circumstances, not in someone operating out of a telephone box with a net £1 of capital, which was the old rule. So, the new rules are all proportionate to the firm’s size, after all, and for most it is likely simply to mean leaving a little more money on the balance sheet rather than taking it all out all the time. Stick a few personal investments back into the business, or a director’s loan and invest that – it all counts.

Those who are against it should lose their negativity and start promoting the changes to their clients and prospective clients as offering greater stability and confidence to them. It is also good inheritance tax planning should the adviser pop off; the cash/investments will be seen as a qualifying business asset, as is required under the regulations, and not as an excessive reserve.

Oh yes, and it would give an extra level of protection to clients, too, in that all too often clear client asset rules become muddied when some firms hit hard times – either through their lack of resources or purposeful mischief when things are going wrong. A more sensible reserve in the business at all times would diminish that risk significantly as theoretically the regulator would know about a  problem much earlier (as a financial resource failure arises in the regular reporting). 

Issues with professional indemnity and the FSCS would also result in fewer calls on other advisers as each firm would have a bigger reserve to be exhausted first. That could mean that PI and FSCS levies for firms fall .

Yes, it’s a barrier to entry and competition, but not as much as the other regulatory requirements. But again, professional advisers should see that as a positive thing for their business, not a negative one.

Philip Milton 

Philip J Milton & Co 



Apfa returns to profit with £117k surplus

Apfa has returned to profit for the first time in two years, generating a surplus of £117,000 for the year ending 30 June 2013. The trade body’s annual report and accounts, sent to members today, show it generated a turnover of £977,074, 30 per cent lower than its turnover of £1.39m in 2011/12. In 2011/12 […]


Sesame confirms network will ditch IFA-status and go restricted

Sesame Bankhall Group has confirmed its network will become restricted for investments and pensions next year. SGB says the move, tipped by Money Marketing last week, will see network advisers offer what it describes as ”whole of market” advice on investment and pensions. But it says this will not meet the FCA’s independence requirements. It will remain independent for mortgages and […]


CPD Briefing: FCA reviews poor practices, Govt mulls auto-enrol ban

The latest edition of Newsbrief counts as 1 hour of structured CPD and covers the regulatory and marketplace changes which took place during October 2013. Visit the Money Marketing CPD Centre to answer 10 multiple choice questions and complete this CPD activity. Just click into your CPD Plan and you’ll find each month’s marketplace changes round-up […]


Govt under fire for ‘cavalier’ Help to Buy regulatory carve-out

The Government has come under fire for allowing HomeBuy agents under the first part of the Help to Buy scheme to continue to be unregulated. Under the first part of the Help to Buy scheme, launched in April, borrower eligibility is assessed by HomeBuy agents with the Home and Communities Agency. To qualify for a 20 […]

Greg Broomer 2

Survey looks at the challenges facing businesses post auto-enrolment

A survey conducted by Johnson Fleming at the Pension & Benefits Show 2014 highlighted the key challenges faced within organisations post auto-enrolment. The results showed that communicating the changes and the value of them to staff, and receiving timely data from the payroll provider proved to still be the most challenging aspects of managing an auto-enrolment scheme.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    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