View more on these topics

Providers start to see the problems

As financial planners, we obviously recognise the benefits of a structured approach. This is far more effective than any form of reactive management.

It is also fair to say that if we are to commit our clients to long-term saving with a particular provider then we need to be in broad agreement with that provider&#39s strategy and be reassured it is not going to change suddenly.

Only a few months ago, we were being told by Norwich Union that it was the leading stakeholder provider. This was no surprise, given the ever-present NU advertising. It had secured a market share of over 20 per cent and went on to conclude from this success that:

“Our multi-channel distribution approach, coupled with our brand str- ength and broad product range, makes us well pla-ced for changes in regulation resulting from the polarisation review.”

Then, three weeks ago, the headline read as follows, Upheaval could see CGNU turn from UK. This was prompted by a statement which stated:

“There are a number of rule changes going on in the UK. Some of the proposed changes will support an open marketplace and professional advice. But there are risks in the legislative changes. They could lead to concerns for the overall profitability for IFAs and providers, which could be further undermined by the changes. This could lead to markets outside the UK being more attractive.”

I accept that it was not just regulations in the financial services sector, which prompted this comment but nonetheless depolarisation was a key element.

Last week saw NU announce: “The Lautro scale was designed before the 1 per cent charge cap. We are adjusting the Lautro scale so it is more appropriate – but that is not to say we are happy about it. This has been forced on us. All providers are in the same boat.”

So, stakeholder was a success and then it was not, depolarisation was no problem and now it is a problem.

With the biggest provider in the UK market making such rapid U-turns, the IFA could be excused for being confused. Or is this a form of rearguard action to increase the 1 per cent cap and put CP121 on hold?

The roots of these problems lie in the relatively quiet acceptance of stakeholder terms by the ABI and many of its members, which has, as predicted by many, come back to haunt the sector.

The banks have most definitely taken the lead on both key issues as they saw the 1 per cent as the ideal way to reduce competition. The depolarisation of the market allows them the chance to compete without the need to embrace independence.

As we now consider which products to select for clients, such contradictory comments or at best a reversal of position do little to instil confidence in the providers of packaged products.

It is not my intention to pick on NU, as I believe it is simply the first provider to comment critically on both of these two key elements of the market, albeit belatedly.

I believe we will see more providers join NU in reducing commission and voicing fears over depolarisation. If the packaged product providers cannot make 1 per cent work and fear the new market, then the IFA may need to make alternative plans. We do not need any more surprises – we need to go forward in partnership with the providers or otherwise look elsewhere.

The IFA of the future needs robust commercial relationships – the casual approach to date is just not suited to us in the future.

Robert Reid is principal of Syndaxi Financial Planning

Recommended

Another £10m for SEI Dublin operation

Scottish Equitable Internat-ional has committed a further £10m for development of its Dublin operation.The extra funds underline SEI&#39s intention to become a top-three player in the UK offshore market over the next few years.The move comes as SEI pulls its marketing efforts from the Italian market after recent changes in the Italian tax system abolished […]

The final countdown

Hardly a day passes without the media predicting the death throes of the traditional final-salary pension scheme – with good reason as the evidence of the acceleration of scheme closures is overwhelming.There are a number of factors driving this change but the single factor standing at the head of the list is the innocuous-sounding Financial […]

Melton Mowbray five-year fixed

Melton Mowbray five-year fixed Fixed term: 5 yearsFixed rate: 6.09% Minimum loan: £25,000Maximum loan: £500,000 to maximum 95% LTVIncome multiples: 3 x single, 2.5 x jointArrangement fee: £295Redemption fee: 6 month’s interest during fixed periodConditions: Refund of basic valuation feeIntroducer&#39s fee: £200Tel: 0797 120 9490

iShares – iShares S&P 500

Friday, March 22, 2002 Type: Exchange traded fund Aim: Growth by tracking the S&P 500 index Minimum investment: Subject to negotiation with stockbroker Maximum investment: No maximum Investment split: 100% tracking the S&P 500 index Place of registration: Dublin Isa link: Yes Pep transfers: Yes Charges: Annual 0.35% Commission: None Tel: 020 7668 8007

Flexible reversionary trusts and estate planning

The suitability of different estate planning solutions will depend on the individual’s own circumstances, needs and objectives. When considering the different solutions available there is a trade-off between inheritance tax (IHT) efficiency and access. Overall a flexible reversionary trust provides a greater level of flexibility than a discounted gift trust and can offer individuals a […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

    Leave a comment