View more on these topics

Trade bodies fight to remove adviser info from Euro disclosure documents

Trade bodies Apfa and the Wealth Management Association are lobbying to have adviser information removed from client disclosure documents being brought in under new European rules.

European negotiations on the packaged retail investment products regulation, or Prips, are now entering their final stages. A key proposal of the regulation is the key information document, which aims to make costs and product details clearer for investors.

Prips proposes that advisers include fee information in an ‘annex’ to the KID, which consists of provider product information.

UK advisers are obliged to provide separate information on costs under the RDR.

The WMA is concerned conflicts could arise over whether advisers or providers are liable in the event of firm failures, as the KID and its annex form a single legal document.

WMA deputy chief executive John Barrass says: “If you put the information together in one document there will be disputes over who is responsible for what. This could lead to huge legal bills.”

As Prips is a regulation and not a directive, member states must adopt the measures directly, without national discretion.

But Hannant says the FCA should look at its own rules and adjust them appropriately.

He adds: “The purpose of the KID is to provide product information. Everything else the European Commission is seeking to include from the intermediary the client gets anyway so it is a pointless duplication.

“The other silliness about this is the product comes quite far down the advice process, so there would need to be a conversation about fees before producing a KID document.”

Capital Asset Management chief executive Alan Smith says: “This adds another layer of unnecessary complication and documentation which only serves to confuse consumers.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Let me start by making it clear that I am pro EU. However that doesn’t meant to say that I agree with all that they do.

    This is a case in point which really shows that don’t understand how advice works outside the banking model prevalent in much of Europe.
    1. The KIIDS document is anyway a complete waste of time and really tells the customer nothing of use except for cost. Nothing about the investment, the top ten shares the sector or hardly any investment details at all – and after all the darn thing is an INVESTMENT.
    2. It presupposes that an adviser is just recommending one investment at a time. It doesn’t really work now when you are recommending a portfolio of (say) 15 or 20 holdings and how it is supposed to work with adviser charges in this case only they will know.
    3. Then we have our own regulatory requirements – the Key Facts document. So going back to point 2 – how much paper is there for (say) ten funds? Do the bureaucrats honestly think that the vast majority of clients read this stuff? Do they think that the adviser community in the UK and Holland (and anywhere else where there are ‘real’ – as opposed to bank – advisers) actually provide it all on every occasion? If they do then they probably need an intensive course of treatment and a huge does of reality.

Leave a comment