About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds Other Sites:   depositrates.co.nz  |   landlords.co.nz
Last Article Uploaded: Friday, October 31st, 8:44AM
rss
Latest Headlines

Opinion: Questions, questions

The top five questions life advisers should be asking their insurers about compliance:

Wednesday, October 28th 2009, 5:22AM 3 Comments

by Russell Hutchinson

ONE: Now that the minister has again made it clear term insurance is not a category one product, will you require me to be an authorised adviser, or will you be happy to accept me as a registered adviser provided I stick to category two products and services?

TWO: I've read in recent discussion documents that registered advisers will face a fee of $350 for registration  - a lot more than what is charged right now for company registration. They plan to charge $1,385 for authorised financial advisers. Will you be lobbying for the Securities Commission to reduce proposed charges for advisers to something more reasonable?

THREE: I know that in order to be compliant I will need to demonstrate "reasonable care, skill and diligence". Do you have a position what that is? Will you be running programmes to help me comply? Who will run them? When? How much will they cost?

FOUR: There has been lots of talk in the media about how qualifying financial entities (QFEs) may enjoy certain advantages, and the Securities Commission's own estimate shows that it thinks there might be 10,000 advisers in QFEs going forward. Will you be making a QFE offer in time for me to actually decide whether to join before registrations open in the second quarter of next year?

FIVE: This all looks like it's going to cost a lot - how will you make that easier for my business?

« Opinion: Where's the insurance innovation?Opinion: Advice counts - and you have to have a method »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 29 October 2009 at 2:17 pm Denis said:
Oh dear. Aside from the fact that there are at least nine questions, the tone adopted would put anyone's back up. The relationship between adviser and insurer works best when it is a partnership. This sounds like a spoilt brat, whingeing.
On 30 October 2009 at 4:38 pm Simon Hassan said:
In my opinion the only appropriate partnership for an 'adviser' is with their client. Those in partnerships with suppliers should use the word 'agent'. Special relationships with suppliers mean conflicts of interest. What insurance advisers need is an insurance wrap!
On 5 November 2009 at 11:12 am Regan Thomas said:
Insurance Wrap. Sounds like Aggragation Group V2. Although the idea may actually float well under the regulated environment with advisers who want to cut the apron strings.
Commenting is closed

 

print

Printable version  

print

Email to a friend
Strategy Thoughts

Tip from the top

Fidelity Income Protection
Changes to the wording make it easier to issue policies, but advisers should be careful about proof of income.

News Bites
Latest Comments
Subscribe Now

Mortgage Rates Newsletter

Daily Weekly

Previous News

MORE NEWS»

Most Commented On
About Us  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  RSS Feeds  |  Letters  |  Archive  |  Toolbox
 
Site by PHP Developer and eyelovedesign.com