Is this acceptable?

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

May have been told about the benefits of having a comprehensive financial plan, including a lifetime cash flow, which 95% of advisers can't supply?

Ok I can understand the need if there is something different on offer and the client was interested in it. Thanks.

dunstonh

feesarefare wrote: »

Possibly but in my experience all are happy with their existing IFA until you tell them the truth. Why have we ended up with RDR?

I find most are unhappy with restricted advisers/tied sales reps like yourself.

innovate

Why would anyone want to be a Restricted Advisor if they can become a proper Independent Advisor?

dunstonh

feesarefare wrote: »

Tell me are you like 1000s of IFA's that have an exclusion on their pi policy for structured products but still calling themselves IFA?

Tell me, are you like 1000s of restricted advisers that try to make out they are better than IFAs because they restrict choice?

dunstonh

And I have no restriction on my PI cover.

You also playing a bit silly with the structured products thing. For those IFAs that did limit certain areas and their PI cover had restrictions as such will require those restrictions to be gone by the first renewal.

I don't think I do , just certainly no worse

So, why do you make out that you are so much better than the 27,000 IFAs out there?

dunstonh

Where have I said that ? I just said no worse didn't I . Where I'm much better is the planning as evidenced by the iso 22222 accreditation

Where you have said it? How about the sentence you made after denying it. You have just said you are better than 27,000 advisers.

As the CII say on their website about ISO 22222: "The 'at work' assessment provides an alternative to study-based examination for advisers aspiring to a higher standard of professionalism beyond current regulatory requirements". An alternative. One of many. I am not one to knock it as it is perfectly fine level 4 accreditation. However, having that does not automatically make you better than 27,000 others

Aegis

feesarefare wrote: »

Where have I said that ? I just said no worse didn't I . Where I'm much better is the planning as evidenced by the iso 22222 accreditation

With all due respect, you know nothing about how well I (as an example, I'm not suggesting you targeted me personally) plan for my clients. How on earth can you claim to be "much better" just because you have gone through an assessment?

dunstonh

feesarefare wrote: »

I'm talking about planning , where your talking product. Two different things . Most IFAs just flog product as in this thread and thousand like it on here

Advice is advice. Whether it is planning for something now or later or involves the purchase of a product or not.

Aegis

feesarefare wrote: »

Fair comment, so what do you benchmark yourself against ? Can you see what's wrong with benchmarking against the international standard for financial planning?

I just plan in a sensible manner, following a process of information gathering, shortfall analysis, research of possible solutions, recommendations and ongoing support/monitoring. There's nothing wrong with paying someone to audit you against a standard you already follow if you like, but I just don't see the point for me or my firm, other than slightly better marketing material (and I personally think we would be better getting more people in the firm qualified to Chartered status, as that requires an extended period of study building up further knowledge in specific technical areas).

Aegis

feesarefare wrote: »

Yep you hit the nail on the head. Don't see the point for you and your firm. Iso2222 is all about the client after all they are the most important thing aren't they??? If all advisers were iso22222 you wouldnt see any of the nonsense that's posted on here every day.

ISO 22222 is about either checking that your firm looks after clients correctly or marketing. If you are already certain that you look after clients correctly, then it's only about marketing.

I therefore still don't see why I would pay for such a qualification.