civil servant missold ppi????

magpiecottage

addedvaluebob wrote: »

As for the accusation that I am a liar it is quite clear from the comment 'anyone can claim' there is no argument or rebuttal, this clearly calls into question my statement of 30 years in FS and is not some form of question about whether I jump to conclusions.

I don't think so. On the other hand

my standards are just higher than those expected by the FCA and FOS

tells us that, far from ensuring compliance with the regulator's requirements, you made up your own.

So when your claim to have worked in compliance seems to be untrue.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

roonaldo

addedvaluebob wrote: »

Apparently no adviser or mortgage salesman ever had to think beyond the sales process and take into account that the civil service has/had the best benefits package in the country. This is day one week one before you sell anything to anyone, advised or not.

Nothing in ICOB about civil service or making assumptions about someones employer benefits.

addedvaluebob

roonaldo wrote: »

Nothing in ICOB about civil service or making assumptions about someones employer benefits.

So the adviser should just park any extraneous knowledge and sell whatever they want because they are too lazy to ask questions or improve their knowledge. It's not assumptive, it's common sense, no wonder so many policies were mis-sold

roonaldo

addedvaluebob wrote: »

So the adviser should just park any extraneous knowledge and sell whatever they want because they are too lazy to ask questions or improve their knowledge. It's not assumptive, it's common sense, no wonder so many policies were mis-sold

Part of the suitability check is to ask questions which has been mentioned many times in this thread. It is not a requirement to go against the information that has been provided and make assumptions.

Again its already been said, just because a person may be a civil servant it doesn't mean they are eligible for the sick pay, as again if they have been off for 12 months in the last 4 years, they are not entitled to it !!!! Which is up to the customer to disclose not a sales person to guess.

Just read ICOB.

magpiecottage

addedvaluebob wrote: »

So the adviser should just park any extraneous knowledge

That is not what we have said at all. As Insider101 explained, the rules say that an adviser is entitled to rely on the information their customer gives them unless it is manifestly untrue. So clearly if the adviser KNOWS something is untrue they must do something about it - but not if they don't.

and sell whatever they want because they are too lazy to ask questions or improve their knowledge.

Where did any of us say that? We simply said that the adviser is entitled to assume that the answes to the questions are correct.

As I say, moneyineptitude never accused you of lying but for somebody who claims to have worked in compliance you show a remarkable ignorance of the FCA/FSA rules.

Insider101

addedvaluebob wrote: »

So the adviser should just park any extraneous knowledge and sell whatever they want because they are too lazy to ask questions or improve their knowledge. It's not assumptive, it's common sense, no wonder so many policies were mis-sold

Nobody has said or implied this. If the adviser has additional knowledge that is relevant to the matter at hand then of course they should use it. Not to do so would be a breach of duty of care (though how anyone would ever prove it I don't know). However, when it comes to a private contract like a contract of employment to which the adviser is not a party then it is not reasonable to expect them to know if information they have been given by someone who is a party to it is inaccurate.