Insurance Product Replacement Advice - A Case in PointBY TREVOR HARRIS | VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1This court case is something all risk writers and financial planners should acquaint themselves with. The human story behind the case also appeared on the ABC program 'Four ... Get articles like this delivered to your email - Sign up for the free weekly newsletter More Articles |
Latest News
Court approves $16m DASS settlement
The Federal Court has approved the settlement reached in the $16 million class action brought against Dixon Advisory & Superannuation Services (DASS) following a two-week delay.
Adviser numbers plateau
The number of financial advisers in Australia appears to be stabilising at 15,602, as Count and AMP Financial Planning continue to hold the lion's share.
Two Brisbane advice firms merge
Brisbane-based financial advice firms Eureka Whittaker Macnaught (EWM) and Blue Harbour Financial Partners, which are part of AZ NGA, have announced their merger.
Financial advice exodus has 'bottomed out': ClearView
The insurer says the government's response to the recent Quality of Advice Review points to a return of advice.
Cover Story
Passing the baton
LIAM ROCHE
ADVICE ASSOCIATE
EUREKA WHITTAKER MACNAUGHT PTY LTD
ADVICE ASSOCIATE
EUREKA WHITTAKER MACNAUGHT PTY LTD
Liam Roche's experience in customer relationships and paraplanning has set him up for success as a financial adviser. Now undertaking the Professional Year, the advice associate at Eureka Whittaker Macnaught tells Karren Vergara how a new breed of advisers is flying the flag.
We are going to see a lot more of this sort of thing as companies race to find faster ways to do things. These net-based applications are dynamite, give me a pen and application form any time.
You look at the client and ask, as the question does, HAVE YOU EVER?
I don't like the direction the sector is going. I believe the forms are planned to hook clients into this sort of situation, cheap rates get the premium and have every intention of declining if possible. I believe this type of application should be banned by ASIC and that we should go back to face-to-face questions.
People don't read SOA's mostly. I'm glad to see Fiduciary Duty mentioned as it seems to have been forgotten in this last couple of years with all the experts buying into our businesses. If the planner had questioned the applicant properly there would have been no business done. I don't know what goes on in the some of the bigger bancassurance groups but feel they mostly work under the threat of dismissal if they don't meet their targets.
Thanks for the article. I find it hard to believe that the application, online or not, would not have asked questions around these conditions and therefore fail to see how the app was a "cleanskin" at all.