Sesame says 500,000 clients would benefit from RDR delay

It's time to face the music!

I find it more than a little irritating that adviser firms are still moaning about the onset of RDR on 1 January 2013. As advisers we have already been given plenty of time to bring our qualification levels up to the required benchmark and those who aren't ready only have themselves to blame. In my opinion anyone who is not at least Level 4 accredited by the end of next year is either lazy, incompetent, or has lost the enthusiasm to advise. My colleagues and I are all where we need to be and we've faced the same challenges as everyone else, so I have no sympathy for those who are trailing behind. It sounds to me like Sesame are just worried about their numbers because half of their advisers are probably not up to the new standard, and are unlikely to pull their fingers out in time for RDR. Please explain to me how this procrastination is likely to benefit clients? They are probably better off seeking advisers who are focussed and serious enough about their profession to get themselves qualifed anyway.

Posted by: Chris Bourne

well done

I find it equally irritating that we are divided by comments like this. well done!

Posted by: david(not sesame)

Level 4

Excellently put Chris. If your'e not up to it, do something else for a living but please don't moan about the time given to reach level 4. pick up the books and get on with it, it takes effort but so do most professional jobs. Be honest with yourself and stop blaming others for your own lack of professional qualifications.

Posted by: RDR ready

Wake Up

I support the move to delay the RDR. Although I am sure that a delay will benefit those who need to run a business and get qualified, this is not the reason. There are still too many unanswered questions around adviser charging, VAT, commission on legacy business, etc. The clock should be stopped, all problems addressed and then an 18 month deadline for people to adjust to the new rules should be given. I also think that a delay would be the first sign that the FSA is prepared to listen than someone other than itself. I suspect that they are currently signing their unaccountability death warrant by flicking two fingers at our elected representatives.

Posted by: Chippy Minton

Self-centred?

What was the headline, "Give us an extra year to fleece 500,000 clients"? It seems they are only interested in their own business model, not what might benefit the client. No doubt the FSA has many flaws, but it would paint a very bad picture to the public if RDR was delayed. It is the clients we are thinking about as priority........isn't it? So 500,000 clients will be beating down my door on 1st January 2013, because they are desperate for advice. I hope Sesame are right in that regard, but seriously doubt it.

Posted by: Nigel Barker-Smith

My tune has NOT changed

to "I'm allright Jack" Despite the fact 1. I finished my level 4 last week after starting it on 26th March 2011 2. Despite already "adviser charging 3. Despite having already increased my firms capital adequacy to the required level. I support the move to delay the RDR. Although I am sure that a delay will benefit those who need to run a business and get qualified, this is not the reason. There are still too many unanswered questions around adviser charging, VAT, commission on legacy business, etc. It is VERY reckless setting a time bomb until you know how large the explosive is as it may kill everyone and not just the target! The clock should be stopped, all problems addressed and then an 18 month deadline for people to adjust to the new rules should be given. I also think that a delay would be the first sign that the FSA is prepared to listen than someone other than itself. I hope the FSA has effectively signed it's unaccountability death warrant by flicking two fingers at our elected representatives, including George Muddie MP in particular. Read more: http://www.ifaonline.co.uk/ifaonline/news/2094961/sesame-500-clients-benefit-rdr-delay#ixzz1SZ9LKJ00 IFA Online - News, blogs and analysis for IFAs. Visit the website now.

Posted by: Phil Castle

Sesame please wake up to the new era

The call to delay the RDR is such a shame. Implementation of the RDR is the biggest opportunity to improve the integrity and the credibility of financial advice – a real opportunity to create a profession – and Sesame are backing some misguided MPs who want to put it off! I am so glad I am no longer associated with them because I would be so embarrassed. Well done Chris I love your “anyone who is not at least Level 4 accredited by the end of next year is either lazy, incompetent, or has lost the enthusiasm to advise” – can I add that they may have decided to leave already and a year’s extension would give them free reign to fleece their clients for yet another year. Oh and on Nigel’s recommendation I am taking on extra support staff for 1st January 2013 – thanks for the tip!

Posted by: Alan Moran

Hmm

I agree with most of what Phil Castle says and find some of the other comments rather sad. Just because you have RDR it does not make you a better advisor than those who do not. Equally there is little real proof so far that RDR is better from all consumers, especially the low earners who need advice more than most. I have offered my clients a fee option for over 20 years so it is not a problem for me but fees do not mean good advice is given and taking exams do not mean good advice is given either. Experience counts for a lot it does seem that RDR is forcing many experienced advisers to leave before they would normally do so and I do not see that as being progress or an advantage to the consumer. Sesame have their own issues I am sure but as Phil Castle points out there are many issues unresolved around RDR and it's effects and given the poor state of the economy all these changes and costs are not helpful at this time. RDR is not just about passing exams. Personally I would like to see all those in the NHS pay towards the £15 Billion compensation bill currently budgeted for over the next 10 years mainly through clinical negligence. If we have to pay for others mistakes in our industry why can't they and not the tax payer? I would also like to see the issue of the long-stop resolved as that too is unfair and I suspect is another reason wny more experienced advisers are leaving before 2013. We are not being treated fairly with other industries, by a long long way. Support RDR and you support the unfairness being put upon us by the FSA and this Government so don't complain if things get worse.

Posted by: Michael Fallas

Low earners

Further to my previous post it would be nice to hear from those advising low earning clients (basic rate tax payers) and how they think RDR will affect their business especially as there are more "low earners" in the UK than high earners.

Posted by: Michael Fallas

Ready, steady...Gone

Dear Chris and RDR Ready, the argument has never really been about the time to become RDR compliant. The argument quite simply relates to the unsuitability of costly disruption at a time of econoomic downturn by a regulator charged with protecting the consumer. Imagine an equvalent body closing down Tesco because it didn't like the profit margins or it didn't like the type of tea that it sold (special offer this week). It also comes down to the reluctance of many to challenge something that is wrong. How about some Churchill spirit rather than Blairite butt-licking.

Posted by: Alan Lakey

Halo Brigade

I would simply say to Chris, RDR Ready and Nigel B.Pratt: Take off your silly halo's. You've obviously been fleecing people for years but not recently: not since you passed the post at childish level 4., sometime earlier this year or thereabouts. What you're saying is an insult to everybody who hasn't yet gone through these childish papers but is on their way there. Or who might find the time to get there by January 2013. We will treat your comments with the contempt they deserve.

Posted by: Lecuticus

Lecuticus

Sorry to hit a nerve, nobody is insulting anyone except you! The date set is Jan 2013 as you state not July 2011, and nobody is saying you have to pass by now are they? just that an extension for this is not required. Please inform everyone on what assumptions you have used to say we have obviously been fleecing people for years! A rather childish statement as you might say.

Posted by: RDR Ready

confused

I thought that the delay was suggested by the TSC. I thought that the TSC was a part of our democratic government. I thought that the FSA was subject to the government. Silly me. These unqualified, overpaid, self serving facists and their hangers on, will ignor the TSC, as they ignor anybody who has the timerity to disagree with them

Posted by: Bob

Lecuticus

The papers are obviously so childish that you can't pass them. Good luck carrying on after 2012 - you'll probably need it. Everything Chris, RDR Ready and Nigel said is bang on the money. Everyone else... Look lively - RDR's coming!

Posted by: Samson

Bang on the Money?

Samson What was implied was that 500,000 clients would be fleeced post RDR if there is a 12 month extension to the January 2013 deadline. A ridiculous and childish assumption which insults the honesty and integrity of those not yet RDR ready and who may still not be ready by that deadline. Bearing in mind that many of these advisers will be getting close to retirement is it really 'bang on the money' they would thenceforth fleece their (long standing) clients? You might as well say they've been doing it for years along with everyone else who was merely FPC qualified. If you really need to do it, you may knock your peers' level of knowledge at any time- pre or post deadline- but when anyone goes a step further and knocks their honesty and integrity it's just 'not on the money', because everyone gets damaged in the process. Even you.

Posted by: Lecuticus