Don't blame us: Consumer
Chetwin says the report, commissioned by two financial advisory firms rejected in the mystery shop and written by research method expert Michael Mintrom, is riddled with factual errors.
"He [Mintrom] accuses Consumer of doing harm to the financial adviser industry, but the industry didn't need us to do that.
"Years of consumer detriment at the hands of financial advisers has seen the industry now being subject to regulation," she says.
According to Mintrom the Consumer study was motivated by good intentions but the quality of the study was poor, especially when judged by the number of cases involved (33), the high rate of attrition of cases during the study (16), the lack of screening and training of the mystery shoppers and the naming and shaming approach.
Click the button below to subscribe and will have free unlimited access for a limited time to full article and all other articles on the site.
You will also be able to comment on articles on Good Returns.
