Mis selling of pension

mania112

Do restricted advisers need to be qualified to level 4?

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

Recommending structured products can be the difference in getting pi cover or not. An exclusion has to be better than not being able to trade at all don't you think.

Of course it is but under the new regulations, you lose the Independent and become Restricted.

For us there is no other difference to how we traded for the last three years

That's a bit like saying I don't see why we have to change to adapt to the new regulations.

The new regulations have brought in higher qualifications, the ending of commission and new titles, amongst other things.

Surely you can't embrace some of the changes as in higher qualifications and fee based advisors, but yet decry some of the others?

If that's the case you might as well have other advisors saying there is no other difference to the way I have traded over the last 3 years but a higher qualification.

Unfortunately we can't pick and choose which bit of the regulations we like and which we dislike, no matter how silly we think they are.

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

We've been doing all the things you talk of for more than 3 years , as you know.

Yes I do know. However the one thing that you are not doing is offering all the services that allow you to remain an IFA.

I've no problem with the new regulations .

But you do.

It's the way they are being incorrectly reported that I'm not happy with.

But they're not. They're being reported under the new regulations.

dunstonh

It just surprises me that Structured Products (of all things) are the difference between IFA and RFA.

They are not. Any restricted adviser can restrict just one thing or lots of things. Restricted can be a tied agent with 5 products and 5 funds for example or 99% of the market. Anything that restricts choice must be classed as restrictive.

Dunston can recommend them so perhaps he can tell us what he has to pay - our pi cost £3700 this year

£4096

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

They are not. You look at the guide on here. It's rubbish. Read the Fsa guidelines and read most of the stuff in the press and so called consumer websites and they are not saying the same thing.

Nothing new there then.

The FSA are saying you can't call yourself an IFA because you are restricting one of the services being offered, hence the Restricted title.

Btw forgotten how you pick parts of posts an ignore other parts. Brings back old memories .

It certainly does. I also remember when you used to decry those that worked for St James' Place because they offered a restricted service.

atush

ViolaLass wrote: »

I'm probably more financially savvy than the average police officer and the average teacher but then, I went into maths teaching because, among other things, I despaired of people making bad decisions through a lack of mathematical understanding so I'm different.

I didn't become a biologist to be better at understanding financial matters, I learned about them as I had 3 kids so thought I ought to know things like that. It is ok stumbling thru life as it comes, until you have others depending on you.

Teacher, biologist, policeman- I thought all would at least have education to A level if not Uni so all should be able to understand the basic maths (which should be less than GCSE level) that mean Public sector pensions are great pensions even after any changes.

Or you could just listen to your union instead.

atush

feesarefare wrote: »

Thanks but possibly meaningless as we might have different turnover etc

If it is so meaningless, then why did you ask him?