In a statement, ASIC said it had banned former Aon Hewitt Financial Advice representative Andrew Hills following surveillance from 2014 to 2017 that found Mr Hills had allegedly authorised misleading letters to be issued to Aon Master Trust members.
The letters related to the transition to Aon MySuper products and contained inaccurate information around the performance of Aon MySuper, the timing of the MySuper transition, and the lower fees and premiums associated with Aon MySuper, ASIC alleged.
The letters further misled consumers that they would be opted out of the transition to MySuper within five days if they did not respond to the letters, and said some consumers had been given financial advice not to transition to MySuper, the regulator said.
“The letters did not disclose that it would be in Mr Hills’ interests if the members decided to opt out of MySuper, because his company would continue to receive commissions if the members opted out of MySuper,” ASIC said.
“After receiving the letters, hundreds of members did not fully transition to MySuper. Instead, their accrued default amounts remained in Aon Master Trust’s ‘choice’ superannuation product, which was generally more expensive than the MySuper product.”
Under the government’s Stronger Super reforms, members were required to be transitioned to MySuper products by default by 1 July 2017 unless they opted out.
Mr Hills was an authorised representative of Aon Hewitt Financial Advice Limited between February 2009 and December 2018.
The group’s financial advice business was sold in a management buyout in early 2019.
According to ASIC data, Mr Hills’ authorisation was ceased earlier this month.
To the IFA is it your obligation to keep publishing these negative events? Do you think those IFAs who are not doing any wrong give a stuff? Can you improve the framework when releasing these, after all accountants get removed and so do teachers. It is nothing new and regulation can not control behaviour. Think about it. You are bombarding my email with crap and sometimes worthy articles so I remain subscribed.
I heard the licensee sent the letters to the members on Mr Hills behalf. Surely that implicates the licensee in all this?? The licensee condoned this action.
Not condoning this behaviour but did the MySuper product also outperform the higher fee product?
So he was banned because members chose not to (or ignored the material altogether) respond to a call-to-action? Yes some may have been advised to not proceed, though how many MySuper products actually have performed exceptionally anyway since their establishment when compared to a bespoke/tailored portfolio? Not to mention the fact that Advisers still seem to be bearing, in some instances, 100% of the blame for investors not reading documentation or looking at their own financial situation or positions.
No, it looks like he was banned because he lied to the members about their best choice of option to protect his own revenue stream.
From what was described a 4 Year ban seems light on.