Yesterday, BT Financial Group clarified that Westpac Life is the only insurer included on the APL for its bank channel advisers after ASIC deputy chair Peter Kell told a parliamentary joint committee that the regulator would be “surprised” if a licensee had only one insurer on its APL.
Responding to questions from ifa, a spokesperson from AMP explained the firm’s APLs include numerous insurers.
“Our licensee APLs provide broad coverage of the major insurers, with Charter and Hillross offering eight products, and AMP Financial Planning six,” the spokesperson said.
“We also enable our advisers to select a different insurance provider through an approval process, if it is in the best outcome for the customer. Our APLs are reviewed every year.”
ifa also confirmed the number of insurers included on the Commonwealth Bank’s licensees’ APLs yesterday in the wake of BT Financial Group’s revelation.
In the case of AMP, AMP requires payments around the $300K mark from insurers to get on their APL. So for them it’s a win win. Quality of insurance company is not considered…. admission to the APL list is based on shelf space fees and who has the biggest pay cheque. The adviser sitting in the local AMP then is told that a “rigourous” selection process has been used.
Note to all of you and ASIC – how do you satisfy the “best interests duty” , when you only have 1 product on your APL. How??
Why not? Granted it might be more difficult and granted it may mean their are better products available for the client, but the Best Interests duty is about matching a clients needs to product, such that they are left in a better position. Its not about finding the ultimate product for them.
I am a CFP with AMP Financial Planning. We have most of the major insurers on our APL. I currently put more business with One Path and Asteron than AMP. Also there are no perks or licensee fee reductions or easier compliance if we put business with AMP. Not sure where that idea came from?
Maybe you should start writing business with AMP, that way you’ll get payments from the Development and management advice program, the Business growth advice payment process, perhaps the business buyback option, or the professional development program, perhaps even the Summit program, maybe even the Mid-tier study tours… or even the Amicus program….. this list just keeps going and going and going…You can’t get licensee reductions if you pay diddly squat to start with..
All of the payments you refer to (DMA, BGA etc…) are totally product agnostic. You are eligible for these payments regardless of which product provider business is placed with. eligibility would be exactly the same if all business is written with MLC, Ateron, AMP or anyone else. It is disappointing to see comments from allegedly educated and professional planners who haven’t bothered to investigate facts and research the accuracy of their comments on these forums. It isn’t difficult to ascertain the facts, rather than opinionating in ignorance.
You are missing the point IFA.. If you are an AMP adviser or restricted adviser tied to a product owner your dealer group fees are say $40,000 but if you use AMP or the home teams product then your dealer group fees are much cheaper say $20,000. All claimed on the basis of lower compliance work.. Why don’t you go back and ask CBA/ANZ and their licenses what the differences in dealer group fees are when they select a narrow list and predominately use say OnePath or One Answer or the home team.. In the case of AMP access to discounted fees. Whilst you’re there why don’t you ask these same dealer groups why they prohibit communication from competitors. When I was there last it was because their advisers didn’t want junk mail from other companies.
Rubbish. I am licensed through AMPFP. The licensee fees are the same regardless of where the revenue is generated.
Get off your IFA high horse and get your facts right.
Sorry I”ll tailor my wording for all the AMP guys out their….if you use AMP and the other products that paid $300K to get on the AMP APL you’ll pay No dealer group fees and if you use solely AMP products AMP will pay no delear group fees and we’ll even pay for the following……. Development Management and advice recognition (DMA) program….Business Growth and Advice Payments… Business Buyback…Payment for the Summit convention…payment for the mid tier study tours..payment for the Amicus program upto $15K…sharing of placement fees..blah blah blah the payments go on and go on and go on… Start using Colonial First State or BT and see how you get on guys.
There’s a lot of people who had bad experiences with AMP and similar companies from 20-30 years ago, who are still so bitter and angry about it they haven’t noticed things have moved on. AMP may be far from perfect, but they are better than most of the out of date stories told about them.
Yep. Assuming you are an AMP aligned adviser sir, have you been told about the 15% increase on stepped premiums, and the 29% increase to level premiums, applied by AMP to former AXA IP policies from the 1990s, as announced in 2017. Same leopard, same spots !.
Whats your point? Your mixing product issues with licensing issues.
Aren’t you sick of bringing this up every other week? All companies are increasing rates, as you know.
AMP are unable to justify increasing Level TERM LIFE(only) rates by 12%
A price gouge if Ive ever seen one!
Memo to IFA. Its not the number of insurers who matter, its the quality of the alternative offering. The banks are very cute about ensuring the insurers that do end up on the list DO NOT offer quality alternatives. I hear BT does not appear on MLC APLs for instance, and Clearview constantly complain they cant get on any institutional AFSL
Just don’t read and print the Press Release – get further detail !!!! Go back to AMP today please
Peter Kell is surprised ??? or asleep . Happy to have a coffee with him if he wishes to discuss our issues in the financial planning sector .
What’s the big deal? We all know you can not be a little bit conflicted, but you can be 100% conflicted, just ask the industry super fund planners.
For reasons outlined elsewhere in this august journal, there is no reason most consumers would expect AMP to have any insurer other than AMP on their APL.
But they would expect Charter and Hillross to have access to all insurers, and not be under any sort of control or influence from a product brand like AMP.