tmmonline.nz  |   landlords.co.nz        About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds

NZ's Financial Adviser News Centre

GR Logo
Last Article Uploaded: Friday, December 6th, 9:36AM

News

rss
Latest Headlines

Reserve dispute resolution scheme revealed

The reserve dispute resolution scheme for financial advisers will be provided by Dispute Resolution Services Limited (DRSL).

Tuesday, June 22nd 2010, 5:03AM 3 Comments

by Jenha White

Neil McKellar, chief executive of DRSL says the company was advised it was the preferred tenderer by the Minister of Consumer Affairs at the end of April.

"Our appointment is subject to contract negotiations, Cabinet approval and appointment by the Governor General. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs is managing that process," he says.

DRSL is a specialist dispute resolution company with more than 10 years' experience.  It is calling its service for financial advisers the Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) scheme and it has a network of independent financial sector consultants it will work with.

The government is currently working on FDR's fees but says they will be in line with industry-led scheme charges.

The FDR scheme provides a three-level complaint process, which aims to resolve disputes efficiently and thoroughly. 

Disputes that can't be resolved move through the dispute levels and scheme members are charged a higher complaint resolution fee at each level.

If an agreement between the parties cannot be reached, FDR will issue a formal decision. If a complainant is satisfied with the outcome of the formal decision it becomes binding on the scheme member.

Complainants who are still not happy with the outcome have the option of taking their dispute through other channels such as the Courts or the Disputes Tribunal.

There is also a compensation cap of $200,000. A complaint can be taken to FDR that involves more than $200,000, but the maximum compensation available will still be $200,000.

To register for the complaints process, the complaint is assessed for jurisdiction and deadlock to see if it can be considered by FDR.

The complaint must have already been made to the scheme member, and the scheme member given an opportunity to resolve it. The complaint must also be about an event that happened on or after 1 October, 2010 (the date from which FDR can accept complaints).

The scheme is currently open for registrations of interest but financial service providers and advisers can't apply to be scheme members until July 1.

 

 

Jenha is a TPL staff reporter. jenha@tarawera.co.nz

« Officials didn't ask for regulatory changesFinancial advisers told despite the changes don't delay »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 22 June 2010 at 10:24 am alan said:
two qustions come to mind after reading this.
1) no mention is made of what the adviser can do if he/she is dissatisfied with the decision.
2) what effect is this likely to have on PI insurance premiums?
On 22 June 2010 at 5:20 pm tony vidler said:
Agreed.

I will be wanting to know what appeals process there is as part of my assessment of providers, together with understanding the extent of technical knowledge contained within the arbitrators/adjudicators.

They may well be extremely well versed in how to resolve a dispute, but do they know how to understand what constitutes "right behaviour" or "right advice"?

And if the complaint is deemed spurious, or even if it is ultimately found to be simply baseless, do I get my claims fees refunded?
On 23 June 2010 at 8:41 pm David said:
Under the FSP Act, there is no right of appeal for advisers if they don't like the decision of the disputes scheme. If an adviser thinks the process( as opposed to the decision) was unfair, there may be grounds for a judicial review. I would look for a disputes resolution scheme where my potential liability was as low as possible (currently FSCL where the compensation is capped at $100K), and where the decision makerhas had experience in resolving investment advice complaints and there is ability for industry input in the formal decisions.
Commenting is closed

 

print

Printable version  

print

Email to a friend
News Bites
Latest Comments
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “@Backstage, thanks. I agree there is no relationship to CoFI, though, from a service perspective, I have two other providers...”
    2 days ago by JPHale
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “Partners Life has decided to stop using its COM for advisers as it believes the system may breach the CoFI regulations which...”
    3 days ago by Amused
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “Insurance companies should stick to their lane. They are not advisers and even those that employ advisers should not be crossing...”
    3 days ago by Tash
  • [GRTV] The nitty gritty of Smart’s ETFs
    “Advisors should consider all gateways into investment markets including cheaply priced ETFs to provide access to low priced...”
    3 days ago by Pragmatic
  • DRS member or not - client care remains advisers’ responsibility
    “FAPs are members of DRS too. Substitute “adviser” for “FAP” and the story is actually a lot more accurate. If...”
    4 days ago by Aggressively_passive
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  |  Disclaimer
 
Site by Web Developer and eyelovedesign.com