Following an ASIC investigation, the company was found to not have had “adequate” processes in place to ensure if its advisers were avoiding quality checks or recommending non-approved products.
It comes after former adviser John Doyle breached his best interest obligations by giving inappropriate advice while working as a rep for RI Advice between May 2013 and June 2016.
“Financial advice licensees need to understand that they can be liable if their advisers do not act in the best interests of their clients and do not prioritise their clients’ interests over their own,” ASIC deputy chair Sarah Court said.
“ASIC commenced this proceeding because of the harm caused to investors when advice is not appropriate. In some cases, Mr Doyle’s clients were retired, or approaching retirement.
“Licensees need to have proper systems and processes in place to monitor the advice given by advisers to make sure consumers are protected.”
A hearing date for RI Advice and Mr Doyle is yet to be set.
[quote=Anonymous]This will all be irrelevant once we go to individual licensing directly with ASIC in a few years.[/quote] that move will be the death of advisers, in this case the adviser was wrong and hid it, asic can’t keep up now how do you think they will go if they had to monitor 18000 individuals ?
It will be closer to 10,000 than 18,000…
Because the Doyle’s of the advice world will have left. Problem solved.
How cowardly of the two most senior RI executives at the time (both now at IOOF), to abscond from their responsibilities by blaming a subordinate. How safe would you feel fighting in the trenches with those two?!?
Sounds like all middle management from every large licensee I have ever met lol.
This will all be irrelevant once we go to individual licensing directly with ASIC in a few years.
Wait until we find out what this adviser did after 2016 and which AFSL he was with and then what they did to monitor and supervise him.
Don, our industry is indeed in a bad way regardless of where you profess to be as an adviser. Ever the smaller shrinking pie of clients will we see as costs go up inferring that very few will be able to afford advice. Risk, investment, smsf, etc……back to the bad old days of sales sales sales. This is without doubt the worst government we have seen filled with lies deceipt and ultimately destruction of many advisers livelihood and for what I ask? Disgraceful and also disgusted. The one rule we should all follow is never trust government regardless of persuasion as they simply don’t care other than for themselves and their mates….banks insurance companies and the industry super funds.
Actually the one rule I follow is just to give excellent advice and service, and my business is thriving. Profits are increasing, as are client numbers, referrals and the size of my team. The Government make the rules, how we interpret them and enact them in our businesses day to day is up to us. Just like the AFL, St Kilda and Hawthorn have both been playing the same game in the same league with the same rules for decades. It’s not the game or the rules that are the problem, while they are not ideal for sure, some still thrive my friend.
Great to hear and bet your costs are rising also because of the government…
The more worrying thing is the Head of RI Advice at the time is now the Chief Advice Officer at IOOF. Why do we continue to promote those who are intent on bringing us down. The Boys Club?
Since the dawn of time the same people get the same jobs. DO the best you can, even if it’s horrendous, by the time you’re found wanting you are already 2-3 jobs down the line. And people wonder why history repeats.
And nary one of these guys have ever owned a practice or given advice.
Another institutionally owned licencee….how surprising!
Adviser will get the proverbial boot….Licencee a fine or EU or slap on wrist – that’s fair??
Yes it is fair!!
Lets hope that the personnel that were involved at top level for RI Advice at the time and whom are still working for IOOF will be dealt with accordingly
Whilst I respect that non compliance needs to be monitored. What I don’t like is that now the PI Insurance will rocket up for other RI advisers who didn’t commit the breach and they are also paying over $3K a year for ASIC to find these advisers. Its just not a fair system.
I agree with you, Anonymous, however I think the reason it ratchets up is not so much the other advisers but the potential worry the insurer may have with the AFSL given it didn’t monitor that last adviser. It perhaps shows the AFSL is the risk, not advisers, but the advisers cop the higher premium as it is passed on through the AFSL. Yep, nothing is fair these days. Any wonder why new entrants to the game are thin on the ground?! But don’t worry, politicians still get our tax money to finance campaigns to convince us they deserve another election victory and a few more years of milking us solely for their purposes. Everything’s fine . . .