The regulator made the update as part of its revised timetable of ongoing work following the COVID-19 pandemic, saying it would release an update to RG 245 around advice fee consents and make the relevant legislative instruments in December 2020, “subject to passage of legislation”.
In the update, the regulator also noted it intended to release a draft legislative instrument around reference checking for financial advisers in October 2020, or earlier if legislation was introduced to Parliament before that date.
Updated guidance around breach reporting for AFSLs would now be pushed back to February 2021, ASIC said.
The regulator also released its interim corporate plan for 2020-21, announcing it had created a new working group to respond to “a marked increase” in the provision of unlicensed advice as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
ASIC said the group would expand its “unlicensed advice regulatory toolkit” so the regulator could more effectively identify and take enforcement against unlicensed advice.
As part of the plan, the regulator said it would also carefully monitor the use of its relief provisions around low-cost super advice among both IFAs and intra-fund advisers in super funds and “take enforcement action where appropriate”.
In addition, ASIC said it would move to ensure consumers experiencing financial hardship would not have their money trapped in frozen managed funds, by establishing standard relief and eligibility criteria through which investment managers needed to release client funds.
The regulator said it would “explore a potential industry wide solution, such as making a legislative instrument” to ensure consumer funds were released.
In the insurance sector, ASIC said it would be reviewing a sample of policy documents and monitoring policy negotiations around group insurance, to ensure exclusions were not inserted following the crisis that would harm consumers.
The regulator noted that in the current environment, it was likely that “cover exclusions may be introduced into new life insurance policies at renewal as a response to current and emerging risks”.
“There is a risk that some products may no longer meet policyholders’ needs or expectations, particularly if these are not clearly communicated,” ASIC said.
A whole new industry on the rise at ASIC. Get out of advice and into compliance that s where the Jam is these days
yes, and Colonial First State are already rushing these changes to commence July 1st 2020.
Pure madness. – the exodus continues.
in other words, is ASIC saying they will stop insurers putting in new exclusions? Sounds like it. And it very unlikely they would do it for existing policy holders, or legally be able to anyway. But the fake news on ABC about TAL or one of the others insurers providing new policy holders, working in hospitals, with a COVID restriction, and presenting it as they are trying to profit from COVID and trying to decide customers. load of crap. whats wrong with that a life insurer trying to manage risk, and they trying to stay in business offering terms they think are reasonable. They are not in the charity business
Given the incredible inconsistency of remuneration structures for advisers in Australia, perhaps ASIC could shut down intrafund advice bonuses first, given these ongoing fees paid by Industry Fund members are charged without any opt in and without member consent – to cross-subside advice to other members for advice most members never receive. All advisers are equal – except some advisers are more equal than others.
can someone send this to the bright sparks at AMPFP. They are rushing through these changes now!
same as MLC, I think the big aligned dealers had to do a deal with asic to keep their licenses – part of the deal was going to 12 month fixed term fees, nothing else makes sense
I think 12 month agreements are inevitable anyway so its not a bad thing, its just the timing of implementation with June etc is very difficult. And the 12 month time period allows less leeway than the 2 year opt in in terms of when fees have to be turned off. But no FDS is an advantage so I get the business case. I think in some ways they have agreed so that they can be seen to lead the industry and make up for some lost reputation coming from Hayne, and that makes sense too.
You’re correct Phil. AMP confirmed with me at last meeting with BDM
Same as IOOF – that’s right had to be SEEN to be squeaky clean..