View more on these topics

Present system cannot cope

When we responded to the latest review of polarisation, we did so in line


with the FSA&#39s stated objective instead of simply defending the status quo


because of changes afoot in the market, particularly the rapid move to


e-commerce.


An open debate is necessary if the logistical problems which multi-ties


would bring – for example, what happens to the client when one or more


multi-ties finish? – are to be exposed to the widest poss ible audience.


Currently, many providers rebadge other companies&#39 products or use


third-party administrators.


This process, known as white labelling, allows providers to have a full


range of products where they have gaps at present, such as PHI. As white


labelling is currently available, there is no need to introduce multi-ties.


To allow multi-ties where someone could market five or six companies&#39


products and display all those brands would lead the consumer to assume


that someone was independent when they were not.


We therefore proposed that white labelling gives that access to a full


range of products and multi-ties are unnecessary.


But there is a lack of open debate, which is unfortunate and does nothing


to bring us close to the common goal of clarity for the consumer.


The other key points in our response concerned commission rebates and titles.


The former is where the Office of Fair Trading pointed to the potential


for bias where commission was negotiated at the same time as evaluat ing


the competitiveness or otherwise of individual provid ers&#39 contracts.


If commission were added to plans after the evaluation, no bias would


exist and, as professional financial advi sers continue to evolve the


transparency of advice costs, would aid the development of the profession.


These “clean contracts”, which we fully support, would not prevent any


adviser from taking the same level of commission as at pres ent from the


plan but there would be no cross-subsidy from elsewhere.


Cross-subsidy is where the full effect of the rebated commission is


reduced by higher commission paid on that product to other advisers.


The latter point was on titles. While people are able to display nearly 30


letters after their name on passing the “driving test” for advising on


financial services, we will not be able to establish a profession with


total credibility.


We need titles that mean something. Titles should differentiate between


independents and others in a manner which is understood by the public and


not just us.


We need to take our lead from a much run advert which says: “It does


exactly what is says on the tin.” This level of clarity in titles is not


just preferable, it is essential.


Sofa is firmly behind the objective of this review, namely, “to deliver


the best deal to consumers in terms of choice, value for money and dynamic


competition benefits”. Multi-ties does not move us to this objective but


then neither does the status quo.


We need a stricter regime of polarisation with the changes we have


suggested. If the objective is to be met, the present system is not up to


the task.

Recommended

Deutsche Bank head quits

Dresdner Bank chief executive Bernhard Walter announced his resignation effective the end of April in the wake of the collapse of the merger with Deutschebank.The merger will not go ahead easing fears that both German giants&#39 UK fund management operations might have merged as a result.The merger fell apart earlier this week, after Walter voiced […]

Standard defends fall in loan market share

Standard Life Bank is hitting back at criticism that its share of the mortgage market has slumped during a time of staff upheaval.Standard Life took a 17 per cent share of the mortgage market last springbut the bank&#39s share now stands at 9 per cent.The fall comes just months after former managing director Jim Spowart […]

Concurrent concern at top-ups

Investors in pension top-up plans could be embroiled in a misbuying scandal if the Government allows partial concurrency on stakeholder. Pension providers warn if partial concurrency is offered, tens of thousands of people paying top-ups to their occupational scheme could lose out. Trustees are legally prevented from providing advice to scheme members. Providers fear people […]

Flying the standard

Few in the industry will not benefit from Skandia&#39s decision to become afull Origo sponsor, putting its money where its mouth is when it comes tosupporting e-commerce in the IFA community.Probably the only losers will be the small group of life offices whichcontinue to fail to contribute their fair share of the costs of Origo&#39swork […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

    Leave a comment