In its submission to the Quality of Advice Review (QAR), BT Financial Group argued that the Corporations Act should be amended to allow advisers the option to provide strategic advice separate to product fulfilment advice.
BT Financial explained that the inclusion of both strategic advice and product fulfilment advice within the statement of advice (SOA) adds to its length and complexity.
“In many instances, we believe advisers would like to provide and consumers would like to receive, strategic advice separate to the product fulfilment advice, but the current regulatory regime makes this difficult to achieve as the strategic advice component may contain recommendations around classes of products,” BT Financial explained.
“Even though a specific product may not be mentioned, the reference to different classes of products, contributions to superannuation, etc has led to a view that this form of advice can only be presented in a Statement of Advice. If this is correct, it then necessitates the inclusion of all current disclosures and disclaimers that are included in an SOA, adding length to the document, even though there are no end products being recommended,” the firm continued.
It stressed that it does not believe strategic advice should be provided outside of the existing AFSL regime. However, the company believes “that strategic advice that does not contain any final product recommendation should be able to be provided in a less structured and regulated format than the existing SOA”.
“With no product recommendations, it should arguably be easier for an adviser to charge for strategic advice separately.
“For clients only seeking strategic advice, it should be cheaper than the advice for a full SOA with product recommendations,” BT argued.
It said that it supports advisers having a choice in this regard, to provide advice to suit their clients’ needs.
“If advisers wish to continue to provide their advice in the one document that covers both strategic and product recommendations, they should be free to do so.
“However, for advisers who wish to separate the two elements and provide them separately, the law should be amended to facilitate this in a clear and efficient manner that remains focused on the client”.
BT further explained that if a client chooses to proceed with the strategic recommendations, the adviser could then proceed to provide product fulfilment advice.
“This could be in a separate document that may more closely resemble the SOA or possibly a Record of Advice.
“References could be made to the strategic advice document, without the need to reproduce information. There would be no need to restate the client’s existing position or strategic recommendations”.
As a result, it argued, “this document should be quicker and cheaper to produce, and much shorter in length, all of which aid in making the advice more affordable and accessible, but without reducing the quality”.
BT, however, conceded that there is a risk that clients may seek strategic advice and once provided, seek to undertake the final product fulfilment themselves, especially given the advancements in technology.
“Whilst we don’t support this approach, and believe the adviser is best placed to assist, this should ultimately be a decision for the client”.
“…this should ultimately be a decision for the client” – exactly. Just as many other areas of the Advice process should be the decision of clients. Do you want a 70 page SoA to put this $5k into your Super fund? Do you want to receive Opt-Ins & FDSes? Do you want to buy the $20k of BHP shares without waiting 3 weeks for documents you don’t want and have told us you won’t read? Or would you like us to tell you what we’d suggest for your specific circumstances, though also what your options are along with quotes for all and then you tell us what you want, how you want it and we’ll do our best to accommodate? Advisers must be the only industry in the world where the government tells everyone what is wanted without having a clue what they’re talking about, and consumers and advisers alike just have to go along with it. When was the last time you went to a doctor and they said “We think your brain is about to pop, though we’d like you to wait for 3 weeks for us to give you a 100 page document advising you to have medical tests, and then give us another 2 weeks to implement the tests, followed by another 2 weeks to come back to you with a report”. ASIC should be ashamed of their place in the complete destruction and undermining of the financial services industry in this country, not to mention the damage they’ve done to consumers and to advisers in the process.
but, but, but, all the different disclosure documents are meant to protect the consumer. Isn’t that why ASIC keep adding more and more to the mix.
It must work, as the big scandals such as the fee for no service and charging dead people have all been fixed now that we provide 70 page SOAs.