Only a compliance bureaucrat would think an FDS is still required with annual service agreements.

Union funds have unofficial regulatory immunity that allows them to give dodgy, unlicensed licence. So do accountants and real estate agents.

There is a bigger story here IFA. The words Financial Planner are a now protected term. If ASIC is calling this person a Financial Planner and there not, then the bigger story here is that ASIC is slandering an entire industry, and clearly 1) don't know the law and 2) have some hidden agenda here. ASIC should not be using the broad words "trusted adviser" given the words Financial Planner are now protected. I'm sure readers would be very interested how ASIC intends to use this protected phase going forward.

I remember a press conference with Jackie Lambie and Sam Dastyari when Lambie said "it was important to have legislation to protect people from dodgy financial planners like our next speaker received". A lady then fronted the media and said "MY ACCOUNTANT put me into a timber scheme"... The broad use of the term "trusted adviser" to describe "anyone" from Cardinal George Pell to the Financial Controller, has lead to over regulation, red tape, FASEA and ordinary advice being outside of the realm of ordinary Australians. "Financial Advisers" should be up in arms about any misuse.

If you do the right thing in the first place, this wouldn't be happening.
Service clients better with more honesty. Simple

The over regulation will come at a huge cost. It provides opportunities for ambulance chasing legal firms to pursue claims they now they will win because compliance with every piece of red tape is impossible.How hypocritical that the Royal Commission being led by a lawyer who criticised the financial advice industry for its lack of professionalism ( despite no experience within the industry ) yet his actions have and will lead to a bonanza for unscrupulous legal firms to mount class action after class action and provide them with their own gravy train. Where is Hayne now in standing up against the gravy train he has set up for these legal firms ? The cost to business will be huge to cover the class action risk. Why was a lawyer given so much power ? The implications have not been thought through. Huge mistake.

When does the Accounting industry get their Royal Commission? The number of fraudulent issues I've seen over the decades is horrendous compared to the Financial Planning industry

Very timely research for these times when professional advisers need to have facts to support their decision making

... Whoever said it breaches Opt-In is clearly incorrect. So no that wasn't me, HOWEVER it doesn't stop your annual Fee Disclosure which is designed to show what they paid for the year and also any services that weren't met so the client is then entitled to a refund.

In relation to your second paragraph, I don't even know where to start with that. If you can't provide an example of why it's wrong or an example of how you're right then what were you hoping to achieve?

If you're undervaluing the magnitude of these obligations that's ok, good luck to you. However even with my anonymity here, I believe that if I even help one person to understand HOW this should be looked at then I'm doing a good thing. Please though, if you're comfortable that your obligations don't extend this far then go about your business. I know which fence I would rather sit on when a I get a knock on the door.

This guy was an Accountant!
It pisses me off that media and by default the public lump these dodgy bastards into the trusted Financial Adviser arena when they are nothing of the sort.
Its a journalist trying to beat up their own story when there is no need to.
Tell it like it is for god sake.

IF only ASIC were as aggressive in their pursuit of crimes committed by the big players

I think he was banned in 2013 for 6 years. If he hasn’t become a registered adviser since then he would not show up as the register is only from 2015. He does show up on the disqualified person list.

Yes, headline should say 'ACCOUNTANT'. Looks like the Tura Pub cost people (including SMSF's and NAB) a few million.

I wonder if he would have passed the ethics test?

ICO = no jail time but home detention. People like this need to be away for lengthy jail time.

Mr Ellis (whiulst im sure is a bad person and deserves jail time) made the mistake of being registered as a Financial Planner as well as an accountant. It seems that bankers, Accountants, Real Estate Agents etc are allowed to steal and cheat and lie with impunity but as soon as they say they are financial advisers all the dodgy things they were doing for years suddenly becomes against the law.

The fact that no bankers got punished AT ALL (not even named and shamed) for money laundering, funding terrorism, chargiung fees for no service, rigging the exchange rate, pressuring doctors to change their diagnosis is an absolute joke.

Its sad that once all the financial advisers cease to exist due to regulation, copliance education we will not be able to go work for the banks as we have become accustomed to working in the best interests of our clients (not our share holders) and cannot easily change to the bank model which is slash and burn and sell the future for a quick buck now.

We would also fail the critical test in every bankers interview. "Would you ruin the lives of 1000 australians to increase our share price by 0.5%"

I can not see him on the ASIC advice register ? Correct me if I am wrong but how can he be a Financial Adviser if he is not on the Financial Advice Register ?

Wow, a second serious offence only gets an ICO???

Why did it take ASIC so long??

I could not agree with this comment more - you have hit the nail on the head, it's time the ambulance chasers were stopped and the PI insurers start standing up to AFCA where the proper procedures haven't been followed or AFCA have sided with the client despite obvious facts that show the adviser was not in the wrong...