As he quoted the FCA as stating, many of the firms that have targeted pensions liberation are not authorised by the FCA.
These are rogue firms and, just like the individuals who sell cars with existing finance obligations, or who steal computer chips and mobile phones, they are professional crooks. Do we consider the motor industry or the technology industry to be complicit? Of course not, so why deride ‘financial services’?
Crooks, con artists and scammers will steal anything that can easily be converted to cash for themselves, especially it is of high value. The rogues in question rarely have any link with financial services firms or advisers. They do not need to have exams and have no requirement to have even worked in financial services.
Surely the article would have been of greater merit had it concentrated on getting the public to look at the FCA’s register or extending the register to include the providers’ products that are regulated?
How does a client find out if a fund is a Ucits, Ucis or a complete scam? Much activity is geared towards firms informing investors about the FSCS, but promoting and extending the register would surely be more beneficial to the public than firms promoting the merits (rather than the shortcomings) of the FSCS.
Chartered Financial Planner
Anders Bayley Scott