Andrew Dixon, head of wealth planning at Kleinwort Hambros, says: “Personally, I generally prefer to advise couples as, overall, I think you achieve better outcomes for the family as you have a greater understanding of what motivates a client.
“The conversation is much richer and the role you play as an adviser is more varied.
“You very often get competing views between spouses, and it is important to understand these, something which you can glean from advising couples together as it often reveals if they are on the same page about their long-term goals and objectives.”
He gives as an example of a ‘competing view’ the thorny subject of succession planning.
“For example, when it comes to succession planning, one half of a couple may often want to ensure that gifts and assets are split evenly, whereas as another may favour an unequal split,” he says.
“There are usually specific reasons for this conflict, such as unequal earning potential of their children, a scenario often seen when one of the children has entered into the family business and the spouse feels they are more deserving of the family business.
“By understanding all viewpoints and motivations, you are ensuring better outcomes for clients,” Mr Dixon adds.
Similarly, Tim Morris, IFA at Russell & Co, says for financial planning conversations it is good to look at joint finances and have both parties involved in the decision-making when it comes to understanding the “overall assets and financial situation”.
Carla Brown, founder and managing director of Oakmere Wealth Management, partner practice of St James’s Place, also prefers to see people as a couple, partly because having a money conversation with the whole family means more awareness.
She says: “Often, each partner may not fully understand what the other partner has and how it could impact them if anything happened to one of them.
“It also helps when we have conversations about longer-term goals or objectives and allows me to see if they are on the same page with those.”
Could this be problematic or confusing? Ms Brown comments: “It can sometimes open up some pretty interesting conversations, which I am sure are continued after the meeting.
“Both parties don’t necessarily have to agree on everything, and can have different attitudes to risk or capacity for loss, but it does help if everyone is aware.”
Individual preference
But Claire Walker, senior area manager at deVere Acuma, says the meeting should be led by the individuals and their preference.
