Redefinition of the requirements for operating as an independent adviser will place a greater burden on those seeking to adopt or retain the IFA label. As such, there is speculation that this could lead to a diminution of the number of IFAs in favour of the broadly-defined restricted alternative.
Using external risk-profiling tools to cut costs may pose a threat to clients’ wellbeing.
Data reveal most advisers have remained independent but business consultancy warns it may be hard to remain profitable.
Clients paying ongoing fees must be told “as soon as possible” if their adviser has become restricted.
Adviser referral website says firms are fine-tuning their propositions to appeal to appropriate clients.
Fallout from the RDR has provided ample opportunity for acquisitive advice firms, company MD believes.
Although changes could damage IFA business FSA’s redefinition does not reflect nature of business, advisers argue.
Analysis & Opinion
One might argue that previous management blundered trying to navigate the radical financial adjustment required by the RDR.
The goal of beating the competition is outdated and should be replaced.
We live in a competitive environment so if you are happy with your proposition, why impose barriers to exit?
The cost of running an IFA business has spiralled in the past couple of years.
My concern is that the guidance offered may lead individuals to make decisions that are not suited to their circumstances.
If the consumer wants advice, then they should be free to choose who provides this.
It sounds like yet more marketing fluff, but the principle of assessing funds on the basis of their outcomes is a good one
Transition to RDR: Biggest stumbling block was providers rather than client fee discussions, adviser argues.