In a statement, AFA chief executive Brad Fox said one of the key roles of advisers is helping clients achieve better outcomes when dealing with insurance companies.
“Advisers know the life insurance needs of Australians better than anyone else, including the need for a more supported claims experience and a better end result,” he said.
“Gaps in life insurance coverage are common, as Australians move through life stages and either do not get the cover they need to meet their change in personal circumstances or do not understand what the cover they have will actually entitle them to in the event of illness or accident.”
Mr Fox added that while many Australians have some insurance over through their superannuation funds, it is important for them to understand what this cover is. Speaking to an adviser can help identify any concerns as well as lead to other policies being put in place.
He said that advisers are also “real advocates” for Australians in the claims experience.
“There is no one else in the claims experience that offers the service that advisers do,” Mr Fox said.
“If you are in the unfortunate position of having to make a claim, you want an expert on your side, helping you navigate through financial and emotional stress.
“Advisers help clients to become properly insured and clients will also find that if they do have to file a claim, they are more likely to have the right policy, with the right advocate, working for them. And this is a great outcome deserved by all Australians.”
Craig,
Yes you are certainly correct, those long gone Joe Novak type advisers when they where upto their neck in AFA business, plus still ran their business, plus were never paid anywhere near what our present AFA people receive.
Those old school fellows professionally handled the issues Government threw at them man they got results. You know the same reasons still apply to people requiring Life Insurance. Yet we are hamstrung by the dogooders who say there are new ways to sell something. Those guys would never have lost control nor sight of what is best outcome for the advisors they represent.
The AFA have nothing to offer, I might be a member, however I am not proud of it, I do not enjoy going to AFA functions like I used to, all you hear is how good they think they are.
I reiterate – this “scandal” was purposely released to ensure the LIF framework gets through parliament. David Whitely has made the most if it with his stupid comments. The CBA Fin planning “scandal” was also regurgitated just in time for the proposed FoFA amendments. We’ve been royally stitched up. Better prepare yourselves for ZERO commission
This media release from the AFA will only be seen by and contained within the industry. We already know this, the damage is being done in the public space.
The incredible reputational damage that is being experienced by advisers right now needs to be defended in the public arena to have any hope of any impact.
Is the AFA planning on a full page statement in The Age newspaper in the next 3 days to clearly identify to the public the need to seek advice,the important benefits of professional advice and the need to maintain a strong adviser relationship??
Why doesn’t the AFA go to it’s adviser members and ask for a “crowd funding” strategy from within to assist with the cost of 2 or 3 full page information articles on the value of advice and advisers?
It’s the same tired old story. Blame the person, not the creators of the problem.
Product manufacturers (life companies) are allowed to sell their own product and allegedly advise on it being appropriate. Separate manufacturing and distribution. Insto funded sales teams will evaporate and people who make their living solely off giving advice to clients over the longer term will fill the void for those who want to buy on more than just price. Comminsure provided an affordable solution. Not a good solution necessarily, but an affordable one. People who want to pay less but potentially get less cover should be allowed to do so. We just need a system that fosters people making decisions on an informed basis, rather than the false presumption that all insurance is the same.