Brenton John Poynter was an authorised representative of Charter Financial Planning from June 2010 until June 2016, during which time he provided superannuation advice to a number of elderly clients.
The regulator found that between January 2015 and June 2016, Mr Poynter deducted $39,700 in fees from 10 clients, and instructed three clients to deposit a total of $26,990 into his personal bank account for advice he had not provided.
According to the regulator, Charter Financial Planning and Mr Poynter’s Baulkham Hills practice have refunded the fees after conducting an internal investigation of Mr Poynter’s conduct.
The banning is part of ASIC’s Wealth Management Project, which the regulator established in 2014 to “lift the standards of the major financial advice providers”, which includes NAB, Westpac, Commonwealth Bank, ANZ, Macquarie, and AMP.
Every single financial planner has done this BAR NONE. You have all charged a client fees who shouldn’t of been charged. You have all signed up clients with ongoing fees who you knew only warranted a single meeting. Don’t deny it, EVERY SINGLE PLANNER AND EVERY SINGLE PRACTICE has done this. Que the liars in denial.
The guy is a Shonk, no argument but to make the statement that you have here is Defamatory, Unfounded, Uninformed and Totally Unfair. Maybe you got your fingers burnt from bad advice, if you did I’m sorry to hear that, but YOU CANNOT make the statement that EVERY SINGLE PLANNER AND EVERY SINGLE PRACTICE has done this. Talking about liars I think your que should include you
What situations are you thinking of that don’t require ongoing review?
Some form of ongoing review is warranted for most clients, with differing time frames, relevant to different clients, with different circumstances and needs.
The question that should be asked is why do you think the client should be charged a retainer to receive that review? I see my dentist every 6 months, he even reminds me when its time, but he doesn’t charge me a fee every month to access that service?! He charges me when, and only after, I sit in his seat.
(By the way, the word is “queue” or “cue”, not “que”, unless your name is Manuel, and you worked in an English hotel with John Cleese in the late 70s.)
It’s “queue”
Er, Aleks or Mr/Ms Moderator, I know that you guys are very passionate about freedom of speech, but does this not step over the line?
I’ve got two eyeballs that are important to your advertisers (who I’m guessing are pretty important to you) and I’m concerned that if standards aren’t maintained it may not bode well in the future for this publication.
This is the usual rubbish that Steven spouts every time there is an article that discusses adviser fees. Unfortunately he seems to be of the ilk that thinks they know how to spend your money better than you do. He can’t accept the fact that people are capable of making their own decisions.
Interesting!!. Assuming the monies were paid to Charter, they did not notice ???? The fees were outrageous, BUT there is a secondary question – is ASIC setting itself up as arbitrator as to the fees clients pay for advice. What happened to the free market?.
It was “for advice he had not provided.” so they are not judging the amount charged. Headline a bit misleading.
please put this article on facebook
please pull your head in natard