Categories: Regulation
Topics: Origen| Aegon| positive solutions
National IFA Positive Solutions is effectively increasing the charges it levies on some partners in an effort to offset rising regulatory costs and return to profit.
The Aegon-owned distribution business has told its 1,600 partners, while it has decided against upping its retention rates, it is increasing ‘retention thresholds’ by £5,000 across the board.
This means partners will have to find more income than previously if they want to climb an earnings band and therefore retain a larger chunk of profits.
For example, a partner bringing in £61k this year compared with £59k in 2009 would previously have done enough to keep an extra 5% of profits, as they had broken the £60k threshold.
But that same partner will now need to write £66k worth of business to do the same, as the threshold has jumped £5k to £65k.
In a separate move, the company has also increased its minimum income requirement on partners from £20,000 to £25,000 and confirmed it will impose an annual charge of £7,500 for those who don’t meet it.
This move was due to come in at the beginning of the year but has now been deferred until 1 June.
However, the change that impacts most partners is the shift in retention thresholds.
Positive Solutions CEO Jim Reeve has told partners the increasing costs of regulation, compliance, staff and professional indemnity (PI) insurance, on top of interim FSCS levies, are behind the threshold increases. Partners have already been told this year's Overseas Forum may be the last for a while.
Reeve adds the company, which last year posted a combined loss, with national IFA Origen, of £16m, has not increased its charges since Positive Solutions’ inception 13 years ago. He says company directors have also taken a pay cut in the last 12 months.
According to Positive Solutions, increasing retention thresholds, instead of rates, is a “simple but effective” move which, in a buoyant market, allows partners to “write their way out of any [charge] increase”.
For example, it says if its average retention threshold is 20%, a partner could write £5,000 additional income, paying Positive Solutions £1,000 and retaining £4,000, leaving no effective increase in the percentage charged.
Experts say it is understandable businesses are looking to supplement their income as costs continue to mount.
“A number of firms during the deep recession took the commercial view to hold retention rates to help advisers through the storm,” financial services consultant Carey Shakespeare says.
“But you can’t go on like that because margins are very thin and the cost of regulation is going up. It is no surprise some firms are now demanding more from their advisers.”
Positive Solutions’ additional move to impose a minimum charge on partners writing less than £25,000 a year follows the company’s decision last year to scale back its partner numbers in a “focus on quality”.
Reeve has moved to reassure partners Positive Solutions still offers value for money, particularly given the alternatives open to IFA firms.
"We believe there is no other advisory business that does more to protect its partners, help them to grow themselves and their practices and prepare them for the post-RDR world," he says.
| Share | |
| Comment | PosSol increases retention thresholds; ups minimum commission requirement |
More from professional adviser
Email alerts
Recommended reading
Categories
Topics
Comments
Commission deals getting worse, not ours
Having just read the news regarding Positive Solutions and the comment that the industry is generally making the deals for the IFA members worse, I am delighted to say that here at Orchard House (IFAs) Ltd we have just improved our offering to our IFAs. We have increased the percentages available, removed any monthly fees and have no reserves on commission. This appears to be bucking the trend, but for the right quality, moral and ethical consultant this is what we feel to be the way forward.
Posted by: Mike Shepherd
Comment or Advertisement
Mike I am not sure if you were making a comment or trying for some cheap advertising. Do remember it is very easy to improve on an offer if it was lousy in the first place. You may recruit a squad of angels but they will still be under sales pressure to make a living for themselves and pay not only the increasing burden of regulation but the increasing injustice in the application of compensation levies.
Posted by: David McMeekin
Another comment on advertising
Mike Sorry but I agree with David on this one. It costs money to run a business compliantly and effectivly and you need adequate systems and controls. You comments are not just cheap advertising they are also dangerous. I have had a look at your website and I may be wrong but it looks as though none of you or your co workers are even at level 4 let alone 6
Posted by: David_c
Related articles
Most Read
This year we have 14 awards designed to mark out the very best products in a highly competitive and innovative market. This includes three new awards for 2011 to reflect the developments in this rapidly growing market: Best Dual/Multi-Index Product, Best Structured (Oeic) Fund and Best Structured Product Provider.
Events
Poll
|
|
Job search
Ifaonlinejobs will open the right investment career path for you. Search hundreds of vacancies on www.ifaonlinejobs.co.uk now
In Focus
Transferring clients’ assets between organisations can be a major headache – often time...
Viewpoints
At the start of one of busiest times of year it is easy to think about all the obvious things...
Sales Pressure
How many articles have we seen in recent weeks castigating banks for the pressure they put on front of house staff to sell. Can anyone reasonably call the action taken out of necessity by Positive Solutions anything other than sales pressure. The truth is, we have regulation costs increasing expotentially.A compensation body who will charge IFA's in order to remove embarrassments like Keydata from their own desk rather than refer it back to the guilty at the FSA.We also have a complete industry of service functions that continues to grow because of regulation. These various bodies all have their fixed costs and salaries which they demand up front. Would anyone ever envisage a day when any of these regulator or service functions would accept their income on a non-indemnity basis as a percentage of business which may or may not be written. No matter what way you dress it up, it is all these costs that produce the sales pressure regardless of who applies it to those at the end of the food chain.
Posted by: David McMeekin