The joint managing director of Sheffield-based Alexander Calder Financial said his current restricted label gave the impression that he was “influenced by a third party”, which he said was not a true representation of 80 per cent of the advisers that operated in that market.
Restricted advisers, Mr Bartram added, had been punished by the public perception surrounding the term, whereas those claiming independent status have reaped the benefits even if their service was “no better”.
He said: “There is too much emphasis on ‘independent’ when in reality whether I have only one pension provider solution, or six or 46, does not alter the basic advice as being the need for retirement planning.
“Put simply, does a supermarket have to stack every brand of beans to call itself a supermarket?”
Mr Bartram, who added that the current labels did not work, were unclear to the public and likely to be “abused”, has urged the FCA to review its original definitions and come up with more suitable terms.
He proposed that advisers should be recognised either as “company representatives” or financial advisers who explain product availability to every client.
Adviser view
Andrew Watts, managing director of Cheshire-based Watts Mortgage & Financial Services, said: “The definition of ‘independent’ is now unnecessarily complicated. Advisers struggle with the definition, so there is no way clients understand it.”
