View more on these topics

Nick Bamford: Be an ‘insistent adviser’ and just say no

Nick Bamford MM 700

The debate about the cost to consumers of the freedom and choice in pension changes continues. According to at least one national newspaper, consumers are being ripped off by product provider charges, forced to pay exorbitant adviser fees and denied access to their pension pots by the barriers created by said pot providers.

So much for restoring consumer trust in the financial services sector!

Blame for this mess is going to stick to whoever is least nimble. You can safely bet that it won’t be the political classes who take responsibility for this consumer frustration. George will simply claim that he is the good guy by opening up access to pension pots for anyone who wants it.

He will also claim that he has acted in a responsible manner by creating a free at point of delivery guidance service and protecting those consumers with defined benefit schemes and guaranteed annuity rates by insisting that they take advice.

However, this goes against the premise that he trusts consumers with their pension pots. Clearly he does not. If he did then he could simply ask them to sign up to a declaration much like the one I have seen on a product provider’s flexi-access drawdown application.

Where the pension pot owner states they have not received guidance from Pension Wise or advice from an authorised and regulated adviser they agree that:

“You are signing to confirm that you are happy to proceed even though this might not be the most appropriate option as you have received no guidance on your personal circumstances.”

So what is the problem? Well for DB and safeguarded plans (typically GARS) valued at over £30,000 “trusting George” has introduced a compulsion for advice to be provided. Understandably, some consumers feel they are perfectly able to make this decision for themselves. Others are loathe to pay advice fees for something they think is superfluous.

Those of us who have been around the block more than a few times know the risks associated with transferring out of DB schemes and pension pots with certain guarantees. We may well argue, and I think it is a pretty convincing argument, that most people with these types of arrangement do need advice. But should they be compelled to take and pay for such advice? Here I have some doubts. After all if we truly trust people with their own money we need to accept that some will make mistakes.

Quite rightly the intermediary community does not want to find itself liable for rectifying a load of costly mistakes in the future.

The regulatory view of how an adviser might protect themselves from the claim of an “insistent client” at some point in the future is not as robust as they might like to think it is. The Financial Ombudsman Service is as likely to override any FCA view in the future and find against the IFA as it is to find for the IFA. I would not want to be on the receiving end of that complaint.

Just as there will be some “insistent clients” I think the best way to deal with this is to be the “insistent adviser” – just say no and blame the Government.

Nick Bamford is executive director at Informed Choice

Recommended

2014-Budget-Box-George-Osborne-Distanced-700.jpg

Budget: Govt delays secondary annuities reforms

The Government has delayed plans to introduce a secondary annuity market amid concerns about the impact rushing the reforms could have on savers. The reforms, which will allow people to cash in their annuity, were due to be implemented in 2016. However, the Treasury has confirmed this deadline has now been pushed back to 2017 […]

George-Osborne-19-March-700.jpg

Budget: Govt reveals where £70m of bank fines will be spent

The Government has revealed where it will spend £70m worth of bank fines over the next five years. Historically, excesses in FCA fine revenue were directed back to firms to reduce regulatory costs. But since April 2012 the fines have been passed directly to the Treasury instead. In 2014/15, FCA fines totalled £1.42bn, of which […]

Solving the income puzzle

There is a puzzle at the centre of financial markets. The global economy is growing, there are signs of inflation and interest rates are going up, yet yields remain low. In this article, James Foster, manager of the Artemis Monthly Distribution fund, unpicks this conundrum and looks at where investors can find income. There is […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I am with you on this one Nick, we are not here to ensure the success of legislation that was rushed and not fully thought through, we know it is a tax grab and there will be those looking to blame someone for their misfortune. We do have the right to decide on what services we provide and to whom, others can take my place for insistent clients.

  2. I’m a, Insistent (not so) Free Adviser (IFA) and proud of it !

Leave a comment