Churn battle: Ballantyne v Everitt
A war of words has broken out between Naomi Ballantyne and the Financial Markets Authority CEO Rob Everett over the issue of insurance replacement business.
Wednesday, March 28th 2018, 8:23PM 16 Comments
Partners Life managing director Naomi Ballantyne took issue with the FMA’s latest report into replacement business.
The FMA said it was concerned that advisers were chasing high upfront commissions and incentives, to the detriment of clients. Many advisers were not aware that could create a conflict of interest.
But Ballantyne said it was not the incentives themselves that were the issue – rather “individual morals” driving “poor behaviours”.
But FMA chief executive Rob Everett rejected that outright and said there were clear signs it was commission models that were the problem.
“Insurance providers cannot shirk responsibility for the behaviour of advisers that is a direct result of the incentives designed by those same providers. We point to the data and findings in our report as clear evidence that incentives are influencing advisers’ conduct,” he said.
“We have been raising these issues since 2015 and we’re disappointed to see signs that the industry continues to disregard the interests of the NZ public and consumers.”
He said the industry needed to take more responsibility for aligning its incentives with consumer outcomes and managing the conduct and practices that resulted from that.
“The link between incentives and replacement activity is clear. Among the advisers we looked at there was no evidence that they were taking their obligation seriously.”
He said, while the 24 advisers reviewed as part of this stage of its inquiry into churn, the FMA was able to take no comfort from the findings in the report.
Insurers were encouraged to rethink their “unusually high” upfront commission structures.
Other insurance companies said they were already making changes.
A spokeswoman for Asteron Life said it was committed to sustainable and affordable life insurance for customers.
"We encourage advisers to move to hybrid models with lower u front commissions and higher renewals. We believe that these lead to better support and service and improved customer outcomes, and over the past few years close to 50% of our business has been written on these types of commissions."
Fidelity Life chief executive Nadine Tereora said her firm had already reviewed its "adviser recognition programmes".
"Qualification for our main recognition initiative includes quality (retention) criteria, not just sales. Fidelity Life expects the independent financial advisers who advise on our life insurance products to always put their customers’ interests first – this includes disclosing remuneration and incentives in accordance with legislation.
“We are taking this FMA report extremely seriously. However, in our experience the vast majority of advisers do place their customers’ interests first."
Trevor Slater, client director for the Financial Disputes Resolution Service said the report would have had a better response from advisers if it had a more balanced view and mentioned the positive findings from the FMA investigation.
The Financial Services Council has been approached for comment.
« Adviser pays $30k after relationship 'breaks down' | AMP: No more overseas trips » |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
I think the FMA is short sighted and are not taking a broader and balanced approach to all roles in the financial services, not just advisers. I can say this because I am not an adviser.
24 Advisers reviewed, out of how many advisers in the industry, how many complaints did they actually get? I am sure complaints about the banks are far greater, why doesn't the FMA grow some and tackle them as well.
I am heartened to see that some of the Insurers are now offering incentives for advisers to take level commissions. This may eventually become the norm and advisers will realise the value of a strong cashflow underpinning their business activities. Many Christchurch advisers owe their business survival to strong renewal streams.
Hey PerryB. When Everett said PTICF means different things to different people.... that's what he meant. Just wait for the FMA report into the 'incentive structures' of QFEs, currently underway. Probably not good management releasing the so-called 'churn report' before the QFE report was ready - should have come out together.
The BEOT certainly seem to offer incentives
One does not have to look far to see an ex govt minister or ex FMA staff member who is now in a high level job at a BEOT
somehow it just doesn't look right
How do I know?
Because the Bank CEOs and the NZBA said that that could never happen.
Yeah right.
Sign In to add your comment
Printable version | Email to a friend |