ASIC said in its first publication of industry-wide data reported under the IDR framework that 3,288 complaints were made about “personal advice.”
The corporate regulator broke that number down further, revealing that 965 complaints were related to service-related issues, 654 were related to the quality of advice provided, 392 were about personal advice fees/costs, 248 were about general service delays, and 593 were related to “other” advice-related issues.
Overall, complaints made against financial firms – relating to investments and advice – numbered 72,238.
ASIC noted that 63 per cent of these were resolved on the same day, with more than $13 million in total monetary remedy provided.
The top three products for investments and advice complaints were shares (52 per cent), investor-directed portfolio services (11 per cent), and other managed investments (7 per cent).
Personal advice rounded out the top five products for investments and advice, in fifth place.
This, ASIC said, applies to a recommendation or opinion about a financial product tailored to a consumer’s personal circumstances. It takes into account one or more relevant aspects of a consumer’s personal circumstances (such as their financial objectives, situation and needs), or is given in circumstances where a reasonable person would expect that their individual circumstances have been considered.
“Personal advice providers must act in a consumer’s best interests when providing personal advice, which can range from simple, single-issue advice to comprehensive financial advice and/or ongoing advice,” ASIC said.
Under new data reporting requirements, most licensed financial firms must report IDR data to ASIC on a six-monthly basis.
According to ASIC, the inaugural industry-wide report was a key milestone in the framework’s implementation.
ASIC commissioner Alan Kirkland said it was important for firms to foster a positive complaints management culture, including a focus on gathering accurate data, and added that firms should reflect on the detailed requirements and practical guidance outlined in ASIC’s IDR data reporting handbook.
“The gaps we’ve identified suggest there may be inconsistent IDR reporting practices across the industry,” Kirkland said.
“While there may be reasonable explanations for some of these variances, we encourage firms to carefully review our report and guidance to assist in reporting complete and accurate IDR data. Starting from next year, we’ll be publishing data about complaints received by individual firms. It is crucial that firms act now to address any gaps in IDR reporting processes, because we will publish the data as it is reported to us.”
More to come.
Arguably it’s easier to couch a complaint as inappropriate advice in order for it to fall under AFCA Terms
0.0083% of all complaints related to quality of advice. How many of these were frivolous, or were in favour of the financial firm? Be interesting to know how many related to industry super too.
4.7m complaints, it seems as though we are a nation of complainers!
Yes, that figure sounds quite high doesn’t it. That is 20% of the population having a whinge! Most likely 98% of them are meaningless too. And yes, how many of those minimal complaints were in fact actual fair dinkum complaints that went against the provider/advisor/firm? They love nothing more than a dramatic headline.