FMA calls for innovation to drive financial advice uptake

This is very confusing - one thing in the guidelines and then a vague general positioning as to what might be ok otherwise. More detail needed! No adviser wishes to 'innovate' on advice delivered, outside of technology advancements, due to the associated material business risks.

More realistically, advisers don't have access to the capital required to innovate on any real scale. The businesses that could actually innovate in the advice tooling sector are not incentivised to do so on two ends. Firstly, individual advisers are notoriously averse to paying for any SAAS offering. Secondly, even if you do go down the route of building advice tooling - the guidelines to get a DAF license issued is about as opaque as you could possibly imagine. How do you prove a system has 'knowledge, competency and skill' equivalent to a Level-5 certified adviser? Don't ask the FMA, they haven't figured that one out and will certainly not give you any guidance.

It was quite a jumbled outline but putting aside embracing technology, lower socio folk whilst requiring advice are hard to assist given the way we are paid and there ability to stay financially committed. This is where Banks could maybe move back into that space. They have the relationship. The FMA could workshop this all day but no seasoned adviser will target these communities, not from lack of compassion, but it is not economic. Add the fact that the amount of documents required to give simple advice now would frighten and baffle (client confusion) further putting off decision making making it even less economic.

I didn't attend the FANZ conference again this year. This old dog has networked enough for this lifetime. But I do agree with @Davidvs. More platitudes of vague statements, with a sting in the tail if the FMA perceives you have crossed a line. But of course they can't tell you that until you actually do it. Makes sense, aye...

The FMA talks here about "good consumer outcomes" and yet as the chief regulator of the financial services industry it is doing nothing currently to address the introduction of bank rate cards for mortgage advisers but advisers having no current ability to guarantee/hold these interest rates for their customers. This means customers don’t now have time to make an informed financial decision. By comparison, all front-line lenders at the banks apparently quoting from the same rate card can guarantee these rates are held for 1-2 business days minimum. This applies to both new loans and those loans been refixed, although the banks are now obviously pushing customers to refix online which is another subject. There is an work-around available to the above however that such a discrepancy exists today looks like an attempt by banks to discourage customers from using the adviser channel which I am sure if the Commerce Commission was also doing its job properly would constitute a clear breach of consumer law. That we work in an “advice orientated” industry which instead seems to be working against consumers who choose to use a mortgage adviser is absolutely appalling. All the regulatory changes that have been introduced in the last few years essentially count for nothing if banks can be allowed to get away with the above. The FMA as a taxpayer funded government agency appears incapable or unwilling to enforce a law change introduced by Parliament to protect consumers i.e. CoFI Law. The above sums up the current state of the Wellington public service which the Public Service Commissioner himself has previously said is no longer fit for purpose saying it needs to be overhauled.

So it's up to us to find ways to get advice to those clients who don't want it? We're all here, trying our best to talk to anyone who wants to work with us, yet that's not enough? Everything the FMA has done and imposed on us has made it more expensive to be here, yet they want to tell us that affordability is a key accessibility challenge? And then Barrass says we should all be adopting "scalable" models involving AI and tech but then says that 80% of our market wants a face to face adviser!! Tell ya what, Ms Barrass; after I've obtained the necessary competence, knowledge and skill, and then continually developed my competence, knowledge and skill, and protected my clients' info and given advice that is both suitable and understood, while acting with integrity and treating the clients fairly, I might try and figure a way to innovate so that I might reach some of the people who don't already want to talk to me. After I've paid my annual registration, and my license fees and levys, and for my continued development of my competence and knowledge and skill, along with paying ever increasing costs with ever reducing commissions, I will try to find some time to innovate so that some of the people who can't afford me or the products I advise on can get "access". <headdesk>

A 5 minute conversation with many Kiwisavers would improve their situation. What are chances FMA would approve without the RS covering paperwork?