Plenary Wealth has produced a 10-point check-list document to educate consumers about whether the financial advice they are receiving is “good, bad or ugly”.
The North Sydney-based firm, which was named Next Gen Practice of the Year 2016 within the Fortnum Financial Advisers network, has been publicising the initiative on social media platforms alongside a statement suggesting it is “time to cull some advisers”.
“Financial advisers vary widely in quality, professionalism and ethics,” the document asserts. “Use this checklist to ensure you’re dealing with a quality adviser.”
Scenario-based examples of “good”, “bad” and “ugly” practitioners are offered across 10 separate assessment criteria, including presentation skills, decision-making style, communication mode and method, transparency and research.
For example, on the issue of ‘transparency’, good advisers “talk openly about their fees and [clients] easily understand how they make their money”, while bad advisers are “not transparent about their fees” and their remuneration is “dependent on a particular outcome of your interaction”, while ugly advisers “dodge questions about remuneration”, the document states.
It warns to be specifically cautious around advisers recommending investment in “new property developments”.
When it comes to the advice provided, good advisers take a “holistic approach to financial wellbeing”, whereas bad and ugly advisers offer advice that is “inherently piecemeal” or promise a rate of return respectively, it suggests.
The document includes a call to action and implores consumers to “make a change in your financial life” and contact Plenary to speak to an adviser “who listens”.
ASIC has obtained orders from the Federal Court in Melbourne to wind up three fi...
FASEA has released exam results for the more than 2200 advisers who sat its Feb...
The corporate regulator has permanently banned an Adelaide adviser from "having ...