This review will be costly for businesses, is brutally unfair for experienced advisers and will reduce consumer choice by driving out many small IFA businesses after the end of 2012.

The FSA has demonstrated that it is not fit for purpose so why should they determine the future of financial services. Clients would be horrified if they realised that the advisers that they had trusted for decades were being forced out of the business due to the qualification requirements of RDR, set by a regulator which was significantly responsible for the lack of oversight of the major banks. 

Why is this idea important?

It is important because if this review isn't reversed and the FSA abolished, then consumers will experience radically reduced choice and as one commentator noted (David Stevenson FT) consumers will be faced with 3 choices:-

1. Use the high street banks – this appears to be the goal of the FSA

2. Do it themselves

3. Pay fees to big advisory networks or planners

Very few consumers would wish should a restricted choice and yet the RDR is supposedly designed to benefit consumers. Now that the sham has been exposed it should be abolished immediately.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.