Jeremy argues that prim-ary advice is suitable for medium-earners, whichthe FSA considers to bethe £25,000-£50,000income band.
The four stages of primary advice that he envisages are identical to those which whole of market advisers utilise and I fail to see any radical differences here.
What we do know is that primary advice is the panacea for the bancassurers’ current problem which is how to mass-sell products without the threat of a PPI-style review biting them years later.
Primary advice offers nothing advantageous to consumers but it does offer insurers and banks an opportunity to market extremely profitable plans without the current potential recourse to the FOS if the consumer is dissatisfied.
The question that neither the FSA nor any other primary advice proponent has answered is why don’t we design pensions and savings plans with sufficient marketing margin that the current raft of whole of market advisers start using them and prospec-ting for new clients?
What argument can there be? After all, primary advice products are going to be inferior, dearer and pushed by lesser qualified individuals.
Consumers need advice and whole of market choice. One without the other is pointless.
Alan Lakey – Highclere Financial Services Hemel Hempstead,Hertfordshire