In reference to the decision by the FCA’s FAMR, to reject the long-stop, my problem with the debate is this.
I always see advice as being given at the point of sale, that is, it is either right advice or wrong advice.
If 15 years after doing something a client says, ‘actually, this is wrong’, then where were they for the previous 15 years – living in a hole? Was the ‘mis-sale’ not recognisable?
Just because something is a long-term plan/product/investment, it does not mean that it takes a long time to see a problem if it is unsuitable. It is a bit like buying a car and after 10 years taking it back and complaining that you have just realised it does not have reversing beepers – well you’d work that out after a few days. Simple example, I accept.
It seems to me the long-stop absence is there so that clients can hedge their bets. If things come up rosy – fine. If they do not, then complain.
Ian McIver
Development Director
Nexus IFA
Bridgwater
Somerset
.png?source=design-system&width=126)