Ats all about the money

It just goes to show these exams are all about the money they produce and not the results they acheive. We all know they acheive nothing other than demonstrate some people are good at cramming. It's robbing the industry, if not in monetary terms but again of valuable time we could be spending with our clients, but then again that would be treating them fairly wouldn't it and we wouldn't want that......

Posted by: Craig

I'm throwing it all in to make sure

I have passed my Diploma in 2009 and have never been sure that it was enough. So I shall now ensure that my Cycling Proficiency, 25 yards swimming, and Sea Scout life saving badges must up the points needed anti,CSE grade 5 French and part 1 RICS exams will tide me over the newly moved finishing line which, I am told, you will now need in addition a degree in underwater soot juggling a speaking parrot and a breeding meercat enclosure to qualify for. This will never end because it does'nt have to and whilst money can be made by a suitable monopoly on exams required it will just increase until the last man standing can at least reach the light to turn it off by standing on the heap of ex IFA's beneath him/her

Posted by: Chris Geeson

exams

Chris, Can I compliment you on your fantastic analysis. Keep up the good work and I hope you pass your next underwater juggling exam

Posted by: terry arch

Food for thought

Having sought legal advice, I have been advised there are sound legal reasons that the FSA could be acting unlawfully if they introduce new rules which in effect disqualify IFAs overnight if they have not taken and passed new/additional exams.This question remains open until FSA fully approves them. Given the shambles to date, this could take some time?

Posted by: alan

FSA threats.

Alan commented about legal reasons why the FSA may be acting unlawfully in threatening to take away the livelihood of IFAs by imposing new exam requirements. My question to Alan would be, could you please ask your legal advisers a follow up question, which is 'If the FSA is eventually judged to have been behaving unlawfully in the circumstances you have referred to, would anybody who spent money on courses etc unnecessarily or invidiously, be able to sue the FSS for effectively defrauding them by making threats without any legal substance'? If 'yes', it might perhaps give the FSA pause for thought, as the place is swarming with lawyers who perhaps are hoping nobody thinks of this possibility.

Posted by: Orlando Furioso

FSA threats

With regard to Alan's comment that his legal advice is that the FSA may eventually be judged as having behaved unlawfully in the circunmstances he describes, I wonder if he could ask his legal advisers another question? The question would be, if the FSA was indeed judged to have behaved unlawfully, whether anybody who spent money on courses and exams as a result of the FSA's threats to take away their livelihood could then sue the FSA for causing them to spend their money in ways they would not have chosen if it had not been for the FSA's threats.

Posted by: Orlando Furioso