Financial Advice NZ launches Trusted Adviser
Financial Advice New Zealand has revealed its plans for its quality service mark, called “trusted adviser”.
Wednesday, June 24th 2020, 9:30AM 
9 Comments
The mark has been part of the association’s plans from the outset.
Financial Advice New Zealand chief executive Katrina Shanks said the association had had to wait for the new legislation to be confirmed, the requirements of the new regime and the code of conduct before it could settle on what the mark should require.
It is designed to be a symbol of an adviser’s high level of qualification, experience and ethics, and highlight those who have done more than the minimum required of them by law.
It is not a standard required of all members but Shanks said it was another step between the association’s “core membership” and those with the pinnacle CLU or CFP marks.
She said the use of the word “trust” was fundamental because good advisers built trust and confidence in clients to obtain the best outcomes for them, and trust was central to the advice process.
A Trusted Adviser of Financial Advice NZ is a member who has been accepted as having a level five qualification or higher, three years’ experience providing regulated financial advice, a minimum of 20 hours’ CPD a year, completing a three-hour ethics workshop every three years, and holding appropriate adviser-level professional indemnity insurance.
An advice firm with 80% trusted advisers could have the mark.
AFAs, or those with a CLU or CFP qualification are expected to meet the criteria at the outset but would have to meet the same ongoing compliance as other members.
Consultation is open until July 22.
| « No annual returns this year | Mann on a mission to diversify financial advice » |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
If the FMA had seen any benefit to consumers both in terms of education, ethics or experience they would have made it a requirement of licensing for all advisers to belong to an association. They didn’t.
qualifications tell the consumers how much you know. it doesn't tell if one can be trusted. otherwise, there won't be dodgy doctors, lawyers and accountants.
Sign In to add your comment
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
As far as I can tell this is only marginally more than already required of FA's under FSLAA. I'm really sorry but this is very underwhelming.
If you want to accredit advisers as being more qualified, more trusted, more useful whatever, acceptance into that club must be based on something more objectively tangible. What CPD is acceptable (surely only CPD designed to enhance the ability to provide services to customers matters for a purpose like this?)and how is actaul learning tested and demonstarted?.
Entrants to this club should be able to exhibit a higher level of expertise in their field,demonstrated by actual qualification in a field relevant to advice (how one gets that is another issue but I am sure FANZ could do some of this itself, using members, fund managers, insurers etc).
There also needs to be a continued absence of questionable conduct and an absence of valid complaints for example.
Or is the 'Trusted Adviser' moniker really intended for everyone who can hold on for three years and simply sit through a couple of sessions?