RDR: The good bits

If you want to know more....

then go to www.alternativefinancialadvisers.co.uk

Posted by: Jonathan Halsall

Here here!

Here here! RDR is a fantastic opportunity for advisers to get back to doing what they do best – providing expert financial planning advice that clients’ so desperately need While RDR undoubtedly presents some challenges, we’ve (Saltus) noticed that increasing numbers of IFAs are embracing that challenge and using it as an opportunity to improve their business models. Establishing the right investment proposition is clearly an important part of this process but has little to do with the ability to shift holdings at the press of a button. Wrap platforms are excellent tools but like any tool, the quality of the work it produces is dependent upon the skill of the craftsman using it. Forming a partnership with the right craftsman and working together to deliver an appropriate strategy in the context of a holistic financial plan is far more likely to build successful and remunerative long term client relationships than incessant button pressing!

Posted by: Saltus

Whatever

As always the proposition is that we are influenced by providers, thus RDR is redeeming. Actually - surprise, surprise - not all of us are influenced in any negative way. Let's be clear, we are all influnced by our perception of a company and its products but that does not necessarily mean that advisers are influenced in a way that is detrimental to their clients. The RDR is a Pandora;'s Box with one difference, this one does not contain any hope.

Posted by: Alan Lakey

It might sound strange

But I find myself agreeing with everything Paul has said in his article, but also with Alan Lakey on thie issue of the RDR being a "pandoras box". There are bits of the RDR which are good and there are bits that are horrendous, but if the box is opened all at the same time, then I do agree with Simon Mansell who was quoted elsewhere that for many IFAs, we may have to become "restricted advisers£ simply becuase a reversal of the burden of proof. The easiest thing would/will be simply NOT to reccomend ANY product or provider and to focus on what is the laregst part of client facing work many of us do which is help our clients PLAN their future whetehr a product is neccessary/arranged or NOT. Having been both tied and IFA in the past, I have no problems with tied advice/advisers, but prefer to be Independant in the true sense of the word, i.e. other than the FSA and my PI insurers, I do what I THINK bst for my clients, not what someone else tells me to think is best. Simon said "WHY IS INDEPENDENT ADVICE OVER? When a complaint comes in post RDR, the regulators will invite the IFA to prove independence from a negative, i.e. a premise that it is true that the IFA did not give independent advice because it cannot be proven false! It will be impossible to prove independence from the myriad of possible choices or at least impossible to prove independence and maintain profit on the advice given. Remember the FOS does not follow the rules of evidence or offer a right of appeal! THE FUTURE IS RESTRICTED Nature and business finds a path of least resistance. Most IFA's will become "restricted advisers" mainly due to litigious nature of the consumer together with the encouragement of the regulator. FOS/FSA is now a consumerist scrap machine designed to dismantle the independent sector" My fear is that Simon may be right and hence why I keep banging on on Blogs that people need to look at the whole RDR in the round and not just at the bits which suit them. Ultimately, the RDR was suppsoed to have been about consumer choice, but by trying to take on so much in one go, with a change of Govt now due as well as possible dismantling of the FSA itself, I think the RDIP needs to look at breaking down it's component parts and looking at a timeline to each relevant to what is achievable without doing irrepairable damage to consuemr choice and independance.

Posted by: Phil Castle