The letter from Colin Langton headlined, LIA plan for move to fees would seal fate of IFA sector, attributes incorrect views to the LIA.
I am afraid there has been a bit of confusion about reports of our submission to the FSA. The LIA's submission to the FSA can be seen in full on our website.
In a nutshell, what we said to the FSA was that the currently proposed menu of charging options is far too complicated and we would like to see it handed out at a later stage in the sales process, when some options have been discarded and the disclosure could therefore be simpler.
As an additional comment, we have speculated about changing terminology. If in future, commission could come to be known as “a fee costed into the product”, with the consumer being given the clear choice to either pay the fee or to have it costed into the product, then maybe some of the emotional connotations of the word commission could be reduced.
I have discussed this with the FSA and the Financial Services Consumer Panel and my impression is that the menu will go ahead but it appears to be accepted that changes of terminology may be a contribution to the debate which are worth following up.
The LIA has certainly not departed from its traditional line on commission. I do believe, however, that we are at something of a turning point, when we must get away from words which evoke consumer body reactions to our detriment.
Public affairs director,