“We are obviously very concerned that ASIC believes churning is a problem and also a little bit baffled,” Trapnell said.
“One of the reasons Synchron was so opposed to the introduction of a Financial Services Council (FSC) churning policy was that we believed there was no evidence to support that a culture of systemic churning exists amongst advisers.”
Trapnell said that in an industry driven by statistics, compiling evidence of churning should be a relatively simple task and yet, to his knowledge, no life company has yet run the numbers.
“There is a question on every life insurance application that asks, ‘Does this application replace an existing policy? If so, how long has that policy been in place?’ It would be easy to conduct analysis of this question and present this as evidence to decide whether or not we actually have a problem, but to date, to the best of our knowledge, no-one is tracking this question.”
Trapnell said that despite Synchron consistently calling for the statistical evidence, the FSC and the life insurance industry did not provide it.
“If the FSC or the industry has since provided the evidence to ASIC, advisers need to see it,” he said.
Thank goodness for the likes of Don, who isn’t afraid to stand up to these issues. Pity there weren’t more Licencee leaders like him raising the awareness and issues, and standing pretty damn firm against the likes of the FSC & ASIC both who appear to have agendas.
Back to my comments. This property spruiking business seems to have now taken those wild claims off their website after getting some feedback from myself through a failed spam attempt in a stock forum…haha.
Invoice to ASIC: $1,550 (incl GST)
services provided: policing property spruikers and taking action to protect consumers
Terms payable 7 days
Regards,
just doing my job
….meanwhile back in reality land, real estate spruikers who call themselves financial advisers are still very active and making wild claims about doubling your wealth with geared up property with comments like “the tax man and tenants pay your ongoing costs while your property value doubles, then you sell and take the profit”. I guess they’re not the concern though because thay are “UNLICENSCED”.