Investment advisers criticised
Consumer reckons advisers aren't doing their job very well.
Thursday, March 11th 1999, 12:00AM
The whole investment advice industry is painted in a poor light by a survey published in the latest edition of Consumer.The survey, of 14 firms, is a re-run of one done last year, however it is conducted in Auckland as opposed to Christchurch.
Consumer says despite investment advisers being highly trained professionals with lots of sophisticated software tools they "don't seem to be able to do their job very well".
"We believe consumers should be able to expect a high standard of advice (from advisers). Yet in two tests over the past two years, we have not found a single investment adviser whose work fully measures up."
Consumer says it's "astonished to find things have hardly improved", since last year's survey.
Perhaps the most damning revelation is that seven of the advisers surveyed fell down on disclosure. The two other areas where seven or more advisers failed were tax efficiency and insurances.
The survey judged advisers on a dozen criteria ranging from flexibility and asset allocations through to questions asked, reports, disclosure and fee explanation.
Spicers Portfolio Management came out top in the survey (it was also gained Consumer's recommendation last year). The one area it fell down in was explaining its fees. Although it's fees ($690) were considered reasonable, the Consumer felt they were not well explained.
Firms surveyed included: AMP, ANZ, ASB Bank, BNZ, Colonial, Financial Focus, JB Were, Money Managers, National Mutual, PriceWaterhouse Coopers, Reeves Moses, Spicers, Tower and WestpacTrust.
For earlier reaction click here
| « In defence of property bonds | Get your tax questions answered online » |
Special Offers
Commenting is closed
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
