Other Citywire websites
Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/article/a653118

Sheila Nicoll to leave FSA

by Michelle Abrego on Jan 23, 2013 at 15:59

Sheila Nicoll to leave FSA

Sheila Nicoll, conduct business unit director of policy at the Financial Services Authority (FSA), is to leave the regulator when it transitions to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in April.

Nicoll was appointed director of conduct policy in 2009 and has overseen the retail distribution review (RDR), mortgage market review and the funding review of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

Nicoll joined the FSA from the Investment Management Association in October 2007, where she was director of the retail firms division for two years.

Nicoll said: ‘I have spent five challenging but fascinating years at the FSA, through what has arguably been one of the most dramatic periods of change the financial services industry has known. I have worked with a truly professional team and strongly believe that some of the policies we have implemented will create lasting benefit for consumers.

‘Having seen major policy initiatives such as the RDR through to implementation, I feel now is the right time for me to handover to those who will drive the FCA's policy approach in the future.’

She said that she will ‘explore fresh opportunities’ once the hand over from the FSA to the FCA is completed.

FSA managing director Martin Wheatley said: ‘I would like to thank Sheila sincerely for the contribution she has made to the foundation of the FCA and for the delivery of complex initiatives such as the retail distribution review and mortgage market review.’

60 comments so far. Why not have your say?

Nick

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:04

rats and ships

report this

L

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:07

Funny that

report this

Eddy Torsnote

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:11

I am sure someone somewhere is fascinated by this...

report this

Mark Cooper

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:11

Dame Sheila Nicoll can only be a matter of time

report this

John Smyth 3

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:11

I wonder which bank or insurance company she will pop up in or is she going to do something to do with "Modern Languages" which if my memory serves me right was what she read at university.

There won't be many if any left to take the wrap for the mess the FSA has made of this industry.

report this

DS

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:13

I like the way she said "some of the policies"!

report this

Martin Bamford

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:14

I wish Sheila all the best for the future. As architect of the Retail Distribution Review, she has done a fantastic job forcing improvements to the levels of professionalism in retail financial services. No doubt this announcement will be met with the usual ill-informed vitriol that accompanies any mention of change and/or the regulator. That seems a shame when Ms Nicolls has worked hard to improve qualification standards and introduce remuneration transparency to a sector which badly needed these changes.

report this

Maxwell

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:14

Who? That is my old boss Stan!

report this

Vinylman

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:15

‘Having seen major policy initiatives such as the RDR through to implementation, I feel now is the right time for me to handover to those who will drive the FCA's policy approach in the future.’

Look forward to seeing what else Sheila can help mess up.

report this

Jonathan Kirby

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:16

‘I have spent five challenging but fascinating years at the FSA, through what has arguably been one of the most dramatic periods of change the financial services industry has known. I have worked with a truly professional team and strongly believe that some of the policies we have implemented will create lasting benefit for consumers.

Bet you had your fingers crossed behind your back when you came out with that Ms Nicoll!

report this

Mark Tennant

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:18

Can you guys never look in the mirror? From where I sit Sheila has done an extraordinary job at a time both of huge change and of markets in disarray. Just because she is a Regulator does not mean to say she hasn't done a great job

Thank heavens half the people who contribute to Citywire are not regulators otherwise god knows what would have happened to the end client

report this

Paul Barnard

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:20

Are you sitting on the Moon then?

report this

Jonathan Kirby

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:20

Citywire seem to have removed a previous comment for no apparent reason.

Are we now seeing censorship of firmly held views by people directly affected by the shambles of RDR?

Disgraceful Citywire.

report this

James Clancy

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:23

This not come a complete surprise. In fact I was expecting it last year.

The only positive thing we can take from it is that Martin Wheatley is getting rid of the dead wood and having complete a new management team.

I wonder where she'll end of next.

report this

John Wilson

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:28

"..strongly believe..." is not the same as knowing.

"...some of the policies...." And what about the others? Presume they will create lasting disbenefits for customers.

And so the gravy train moves on the fortunate passengers alighting and boarding the next train to who knowes where. Meanwhile back at the coal face...

report this

Bob Donaldson

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:29

@Martin Bamford - Raising professional standards is one thing, Disenfranchising millions from financial advice is something else.

Let us see the figures at the end of this month released by the FSA to see how many have left the industry. Let us also see a year down the road the state of the industry as wrap platforms and insurance companies start to wither on the vine.

It is not about making change, it is about making change for the better and I don't see that she has done a lot for the good of the industry.

Interesting to just had a call from the FSA re my latest RMAR. Totally different approach to the way they have acted heavy handed in the past and a refreshing change.

I will bet you a pound to a penny when the RDR great experiment fails, as some else has stated, the people at the FSA will say 'not me guv wasn't there when it was dreamt up!.

report this

Billy via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:35

Anyone opened the book to where she will end up next? Which bank?

report this

Julian Stevens

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:36

"I strongly believe that some of the policies we have implemented will create lasting benefit for consumers."

What about all the others, then?

And is she jumping or has she been pushed? If she's been such a super-duper member of the FSA's senior management team, doesn't Martin Wheatley want her at the FCA?

report this

Mike WOI

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:40

Is Martin this womens boy friend by chance?

report this

John Barrett

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:43

May I please endorse Martins comments and also wish Miss Nichol good luck for the future. Like Martin I am no longer an IFA but I intend to keenly follow the progress of the RDR and the improvements it will undoubtedly bring to both clients & the IFA community. Let us all hope now that she will not lose her creditability by joining any of the institutions that she is currently regulating

report this

I'm an IFA - get me out of here

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:45

@Bob Donaldson - I have to agree. RDR is a huge risk & who knows if it will work. Whether the consumer was ready to embrace such change remains to be seen.

A little more balanced media reporting about the new remuneration structure might help.

report this

Ian Lees

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:49

I wonder if Sheila Niccoll will get her knight hood or some other inflated status . . . and join the opposition in Barclauys ?

report this

Ian Lees

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:50

I wonder if Sheila Nicoll wil get her knight hood or . . . anothe rprime job at one of the insolvent banks ?

report this

Sir AA

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:51

Probably also going to a large Bank like her former colleagues for another pay day - the merry go round continues whilst those regulated continue to suffer from the consequences of their actions and dictats!

report this

David Bell

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:52

Three weeks of the RDR. Name is not Nicholl, it's Goff, and I'm OFF.

report this

Sir AA

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:56

Oh, and I forgot to say a knighthood.

report this

neil jacobs

Jan 23, 2013 at 16:59

I agree with a lot of what has been said on both sides.

I think standards have been raised. I think it was a good idea but poory implemented.

However, the most worrying thing is that a huge proportion of people who implemented the RDR. Steam rollered it through and swore by it's design.....ARE GONE.

If I built a business that was successful, ethical, of high standard and was pure and simplistic for a client.....Would I leave it...?????

report this

Man in Black

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:03

Guys, can we not abuse Martin just because he has a view most of us disagree with?

The RDR positives and the listening bit were not done by Shelia, they were done by Amanda Bowe and Alan Mason....I remember 2007 and a meeting with our FSA Supervisors. I mentioned the RDR pre-consultation in passing...and a few days later, up popped an invite in my email box for a chat with Amanda Bowe at Canary Wharf. The resulting RDR1 was a bit of a dogs-dinner, but it had the essentials of status for well-qualified fee-charging advisers, escape valves for those not wanting to go down that route, and a choice for the consumer...and for the market to decide...

...Then came Shelia Nichol, in that age when the FSA would swear blind that crashing banks and regulatory fund failings were all someone elses fault, where one regulatory failure is always used to justify another regulatory intervention and another levy...and as has already been remarked, they just held Parliament in contempt and even instructed their staff on how to vote in a General Election.

There were some good people at the FSA. There probably are still a few. But she was never one of them.

report this

headbelowthe parapet

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:10

Employees will come and go, although there does seem to have been an awful lot of top regulators leaving before the dust has settled on their RDR experiment.

The RDR is the result of an uncontrolled, and uncontrollable, regulator trying to pursuing an ill-conceived utopia of ‘consumer empowerment’, and it must be said that the original stated goals of improved professionalism and transparency are praiseworthy – but in the end it is bad regulation.

Bad, because the FSA either did not consider the laws of cause and effect and of unintended consequence, or they decided to ignore them.

Bad, because it can’t achieve its published outcomes – by allowing some classes of distributor to continue to receive commission payments it manifestly fails to address the commission bias that it itself mistakenly identified as a problem.

Bad, because bad regulation begets bad regulation particularly when regulation is regarded as a commodity and a tool for empire building: Parkinson’s Law says that (1) "An official wants to multiply subordinates, not rivals" and (2) "Officials make work for each other”. The FSA has certainly seen a multiplication of subordinates, not to mention budget, and lots of extra work.

When regulation attempts to fuse the unbelievably complicated with the unbelievably wishy-washy it should be no surprise that it misses its intended target.

Bad regulation, it could be argued, was the root cause of the last financial crisis, and no doubt badly thought out and over complicated regulation will be the cause of the next. If you disregard the law of unintended consequences, and pursue an environment of dogged compliance to bad regulation at the expense of individual and corporate responsibility (and censure) then crisis is surely inevitable. If you then add the spectre of infiltration of the regulator by large institutions hoping for lessened executive responsibility using the promise of generous compensation for friendly ex-regulators then bad regulation is assured.

Regulation is needed, but bad regulation helps no-one but the regulator.

It’s hard to wish Ms Nicholl luck when she’s been so deeply embroiled in such bad regulation.

report this

Alan Lakey

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:21

Who's smirking?

report this

Simon Mansell

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:27

The TSC asked why is it that the FSA is spending £1.7billion on RDR when at the same time the EU is reviewing the same areas and may well override elements of RDR.

Sir Hector & (and soon to be Baroness) Nichols said it is because the FSA can’t wait for the EU!!!

In fact (Baroness in waiting) Nichols found the whole TSC process amusing, so much so she was reprimanded for this. During the meeting George Mudie MP said:

"Ms Nichols do you find that amusing because my constituents don’t! "

report this

RichardR

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:30

Got to smile at John Smyth 3 comment:

"There won't be many if any left to take the wrap for the mess the FSA has made of this industry"

what a wonderful spelling mistake that is !

report this

Ian Lees

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:33

I agree with many of the observations above. However, I firmly believe, that banks saw the opportunites to purchase insurance companies as they were in terminal decline ( eg with profits - too many companies endowment misselling mainly from banks etc.,). The bank directors - were negligent and failed to conduct their duties with the due care or diligence required - for personal gain. Banks swept the market of property purchase with massive loans - full in the knowledge - that the property bubble would burst ( otherwise why entertain or pay a Chief Economist ). They have been allowed to run riot - uncontrolled and uncontrollable - to the detriment of theri clients, their shareholders - by MP's - who have been even more negligent. It is interesting that fines applied by the FSA ( Sir Hector Sants ) - are paid by e.g Barclays - £ 29 Million from a bank which is insolvent - had to borrow funds from the middle east . What I cannot understand is . . . if I were to write a cheque for £ 29 Million . . . on the bais I have no money in the bank - no assets upon which this cheque could be drawn - my understanding is this would be fraud ? Apparently at Barclays RBS and TSB - it is " Quantitive Easing " - printing of money upon which there is no asset . . . . or value . . . . . . I wish I could write down my debt like this ! What is clear is that like VISA - money has no value ! it is simply a number written on a page - until someone needs to collect - like a pensioner and he or she wants her pension fund . . . . . and their pension funds

have been erased . It is good to see nanks write off their " old Debts ", or in the case of TSB selling off their clients and bank accounts - to the Co OP who claim to be " good with food ".

report this

Ewart Matthias

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:34

@Martin

Did standards need to be improved? Yes

Is transparency needed? Yes

Should advisers be fee based only? Why?

Change is and was needed but the high handed bully boy methods used were not right and as has been said on many occasions by many was against European Law and should not have been implemented in the way it was. The end can never justify the means.

And as has already been said, if it is right why have so many (including Ms Nicholl) left just at the time when you would expect them to stay? Remember in March 2010 (I think) the board made a reported statement that the RDR was a mistake and yet continued with it.

Time alone will tell but recent reports on charging (AWD) shows that it has made no difference as the client can still be taken advantage of with excessive charges and in addition now have to pay VAT in addition.

report this

Ian Lees

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:35

Is that Baroness . . . or " Baron Mess " . . . . .

report this

l'ifa passeport en provenance de France

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:40

@man in black .......ok matin is daft and a silly little boy

report this

Barman

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:43

You lot really are gentlemen, a shameful representation of the industry.

Sheila was a decent regulator that spoke up on many issues.

I wish her the best of luck.

report this

David IFA

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:58

Hey Barman have you been drinking on duty again. If all these people who steam rollered RDR through were so adamant that it was a great success, why leave ???? Will the last one out of the FSA please turn the lights off. Lloyds TSB sheds 940 jobs today- this cut should just about pay for Sheila's wheels and wages.

report this

Neil via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 17:58

Pathetic. I assume that the reason for all the 'great minds' behind rdr leaving is that even they think its now a mis-judged crock of .... I'm a fellow, chartered, with an economics degree (so should be ok?) but I really can't be bothered any more. As there are no more pfs qualifications left for me to take I'm now going to focus on a PhD. 'the consolidation of the financial advice sector in the uk, following the implementation of the rdr' its called.

report this

Julian Stevens

Jan 23, 2013 at 18:13

Could you tell us please on exactly which "issues" she spoke up?

As posted previously, my position on the RDR is that its fundamental principles (higher qualifications and clearer charging structures) are sound. But the FSA has made a bad hash of its implementation. It:-

1. refused to listen to all calls to modify or moderate certain aspects of it,

2. it conducted only token consultations and took very little notice of any of the responses submitted (I recall Sheila Nicoll on at least one ocasion claiming that the FSA had "taken on board the submissions it had received". Yet none of those responses were ever published for all to see and to debate in open forum and Ms. Nicoll refused to specify just what the FSA had "taken on board"., Such a claim was just a BS fob-off, so typical o the FSA.

3. its Cost:Benefit Analysis was criminally skewed (benefits hard to predict, harder to quantify, expected costs now more than 3 times the original estimate). Benefits, yes okay, some ~ but will they be worth the damage they're already doing to the industry? In any Cost:Benefit Analysis, there has to be a balance between the two. In the RDR, I see no such balance. The FSA has adopted a position of These are the benefits and bugger what they cost, not least because we won't be paying them.

4. it's forced through too much change all at once,

5. it seems to have allowed certain sectors off certain hooks and

6. it seems still to be intent on throttling the very life out of the IFA sector by its continuing programme of excessively burdensome regulation.

Now, Sheila Nicoll has been very much on the bridge of HMS FSA as all these things have been happening but, as many have already pointed out, she didn't exactly react with anything approaching respect when questioned about some of them by the TSC.

So I, for one, would like to know the issues on which she apparently "spoke up", because I don't remember any.

report this

Julian Stevens

Jan 23, 2013 at 18:17

You know what they say about qualifications....

BSc = Bull S***

MSc = More S***

PhD = Piled Higher & Deeper. (Only joking)

That aside, I wonder what Ms. Nicoll's severance settlement (using OPM) will be?

report this

richard john brydon

Jan 23, 2013 at 18:20

And for how long will she still receive her particular FSA financial package? Whenever I've left an employer the best that I got was a month's salary and a bit of gardening leave. Is her deal the same as Hector's?

report this

Phil M via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 18:29

@ Martin Bamford

Martin, you seem to be very knowledgable about what Ms Nicholl has actually helped the FSA achieve in her role regarding RDR. Other than how RDR has impacted on your own business, can you tell me the benefit that RDR has added to the general financial well being of the consumer, and the value Ms Nicholl individually has actually added in comparison to the actual cost of implementation of the RDR directive? Your comment seems to me to be so very obvious, but is adviser charging so much more transparent? It certainly isn't from what I have seen and in comparison the IMA where Ms Nicholl originally came from is virtually left untouched in its opaque charging structures. The fact is that RDR has just confused the consumer more, created more cost to the consumer and our industry, and prevented accessibility to FS due to costs. I agree with you re qualifications, but did it really need to take this long or cost so much money to deliver such a basic mandatory rule change about achieving a set level of qualification? I don't know Ms Nicholl's job description or her as a person so can't comment on her ability, however you must know her well to be able to comment on her ability so positively and without any objective view whatsoever. Why don't you apply for her job, then we can see even more of you in NMA!

report this

Mark Cooper

Jan 23, 2013 at 18:38

The job is surely nowhere near complete?

If RDR was truly aimed at separating advice from products, or giving the buying public a clearer understanding of who is advising and who is selling its architects have failed miserably and still have much to do looking at the Bank and Vertical Integration "Free Advice" cop-outs still out there.

It reminds me of the episode of Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em where Frank Spencer becomes a Gas Fitter and on exiting the smouldering ruins of the house he just blew up remarks "Well, that's the best I can do for the moment."

Is there any chance these people could actually stay and finish what they have merely started?

report this

headbelowthe parapet

Jan 23, 2013 at 19:05

@ Phil M

I’m sure the display of obsequious Uriah-Heep-ery is designed to wind up those who comment on these forums, and it seems to work pretty successfully, which is quite funny really.

report this

Adam Grant

Jan 23, 2013 at 19:06

What beautiful irony,... I seem to recall from the CII exams which so many advisers have had to complete in order to meet the qualifying level 4 required by the RDR, that to "believe" something was a clear indication of an error or inconsistency,...!

report this

jim fahey via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 19:13

Sheila who ???

report this

bobby via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 19:18

Top job she's raised standards and made good steps to get rid of the double glazing and mobiles phones image of IFA's

She's shrewd good time to leave and move on to a new venture.

Who's next on her targets ?? Plumbers ??

report this

phil castle via mobile

Jan 23, 2013 at 21:03

I agree with MIB. The only person left ( I had a skype meeting with Amanda Bowe at tge RDR 1 stage) appears to be Rory Percival, the ex IFA compliancemgr & technical mgr. so the blame can be laid at IFAs and ex IFAs as all the bankers & accountants jumped ship before the iceburg sunk tge RDR Titanic.

report this

Hickky

Jan 23, 2013 at 21:57

I wish Ms Nicholl well in her new role, and a great looking garden following her 6 month paid leave.

Seriously, she was not to blame for RDR and any project she headed had to be approved by others. She was one of the better ones in the tower.

But look, this is good news, as it now seems that the changes in outlook by the new regulator are even now beginning to have an effect. Martin Wheatly has obviously interviewed many senior staff and promoted his vision of a regulator whose first priority is to stamp on the conmen and sharks that infest our industry and not to ensure any advice is forensically examined to ensure queens council cannot find fault with the regulator in the event of a complaint.

All those so ingrained in the FSAs systems, priorities and methodology that that could not, or would not, change, are to be let go. Why else is her departure delayed until the FCA arrives?

Suddenly the FSA announced a quick crackdown on the SIPP/UCIS scams, great! The FSA have sat on this scam for years, now under Wheatly's influence, it kicks off! Next lets look at the blurring of management fees charged to collectives. Poor sales practices that involve telling half truths to clients. Sales incentives and cross subsidies are at last starting to be looked at. The property, land and green oil scam merchants need to be thrown in jail, their assets siezed and used to help compensate those with worthless investments.

If the FCA drags this industry towards properly ethical behaviours from all involved, it will have done the country a great service. Martin Wheatley wants to protect consumers from bad product, and bad sales practices and get tough quickly with miscreants. I for one welcome this approach as I have been heartily sick of the FSAs approach of self service, dither, delay and petty quibbles, ignoring the obvious way of ensuring a level playing field between products and imposing this b***ers muddle of the RDR as is..

report this

Jonathan Kirby

Jan 24, 2013 at 10:13

Still at it Citywire?

I see you have yet again removed a comment which breaks none of your guidelines and reports word for word only what another respected journal, Money Marketing, said at the time about the TSC exchange between Ms Nicoll & George Mudie MP.

The statement is not defamatory or offensive but merely reports what was actually said and the opinion of those that were there.

As reported in Money Marketing:

Any attempt to sway the FSA on any issue at all are inevitably doomed to failure from the word go, as would be any attempt to get the law changed to make the FSA accoun-table for its policies and actions.

The Government has already announced that the FCA, like the FSA before it, will be accountable only to its own board, which means accountable to nobody. Hector Sants knows this full well and all but told the TSC so.

Sheila Nicoll merely sat before the committee smirking, in the knowledge that the FSA is effectively untouchable. George Mudie’s sharp rebuke of such obvious contempt was understandable but, in practical terms, completely impotent.

As a result, the TSC has basically had to retreat with its tail between its legs, citing other matters as being of greater priority. I somehow doubt that but there is nothing the committee can do, which does rather beg the question: Of just what value is the TSC at all?

It is just a bunch of men in suits asking a few searching questions but with no power to do anything if they are not satisfied with the answers they are given.

report this

Julian Stevens

Jan 24, 2013 at 11:33

Don't worrry about it Jonathan ~ all your comments have gone out before being lifted and we all (well, most of us) well remember the events of March 2011 before the TSC.

I know nothing about Sheila Nicoll personally, I don't know how much of a hand she had in five years of embellishing and adding to the requirements of the RDR (which is why it's now going to cost at least 3½ times the original estimate) or steamrollering through the FSA's agenda without taking on board anything anybody else had to say (despite her claims to the contrary).

But, no matter what anyone might have to say in her defence about what a "good job" she's done at the FSA and how all the vitriol against her expressed here is completely unreasonable:-

1. Her contempt of the TSC was plain for all to see and displayed a level of arrogance that can hardly have done her any favours with anyone. Plus

2. If she's played such a great and valuable part in bringing the RDR to fruition, why hasn't she been invited to carry on her great and good work at the FCA?

report this

John Bees

Jan 24, 2013 at 11:39

Who the hell is Martin Bamford? Like every government department that becomes unpopular MAFF to DEFRA, PIA from FINBRA now FSA, they have to change their name so they can hide. I have been in this business for over 40 years and I KNOW RDR is a complete failier, it is ill considered people who need advice will just not get any simple. i have never seen such stupidity.

report this

Hickky

Jan 24, 2013 at 11:51

@ Jonathan

At least this new regeime, the FCA in waiting, seems to show they are listening to critisims and,although not accountable to parliament directly, recognise their actions will be scruitinised by one and all.

My concern is that, once the new regulator is up and running, had a modicum of success preventing the abuses that have been widespread under the Sants/Turner leadership, it will then revert to the self centered, ineffectual mess of its predecessor.

The TSC is not entirely toothless, but knows when it has been spanked. However I believe Tyrie has his heart in the right place, but he has to hold together various fractional elements within committee, some with a political agenda that is not necessarily in line with the coalitions views, and are determined not to accept any blame for the regulatory mess on the last government. this does not help his cause.

Gordon Brown showed administrations the way to by-pass blame when he set up the Monetary Policy Committee rather than accept blame when the Treasury/BofE did it. By creating a clear gap between political interests and financial concerns/regulations he understood control would have to be weilded via a back door. Appointments to senior posts have to be ratified by government, and that's where control and power lies.

I firmly believe is that the last government manipulated many of its supporters into key roles throughout all quango's. Charities and pressure groups are riddled with these odious aparatchiks, as well as the majority of quangos. No wonder one of the first things that were culled by this administration were a fair number of the useless quangos, and the remainder are now fighting to justify their over inflated costs and salaries.

So, slowly these unnelected, unaccountable organisations are having their powers zapped.

The FCA will need to be aware of political agenda as well as financial abuse in order to flourish.

report this

Hickky

Jan 24, 2013 at 12:04

@ John Bees

Martin Bamford is a chartered IFA at Informed Choice of Surrey. His firm charges fees of: £2,000 for a full service project fee (report), an implementation fee of 2% plus 1% p.a.(minimum £2,000 p.a.) for ongoing advice and annual planning review.

So his firm has welcomed RDR with open arms.

So it is no surprise he supports RDR. I bet these fees are worth it though!

report this

j p

Jan 24, 2013 at 12:11

on any sensible measure the FSA would at best get a 3 out of 10 for the design and execution of RDR, and i say this because irrespective of whether we agree with the design, the execution has been very poor

report this

Chartered Mark

Jan 24, 2013 at 13:50

It's really simple.

Everyone involved in the implementation of the RDR will be gone from the scene, (pocketing wads of cash and jumping into fat cat jobs with the banks etc.) this is so that when the TSC order the FCA to conduct a review and the rest of the world realise that Joe Public is getting shafted or not getting advice because he cannot or will not pay the going rate for it.

For years up till they launch of the RDR the FSA was banging out the message to the public. Seek Independant Advice and go to an IFA that charges fees. The public ignored the message. So the FSA made it easier for Joe, by removing the choice. A bit like the Fairy God mother, "You will go to the Fee charging IFA".

The industry needed improving, with qualifications and stopping [provider bias etc. but the ramifications that will go along with the good things will be a disaster for the majority of the public, the country, and many in the industry.

Personally I have made the transition. The best things are dumping loads of small clients who do not want to pay my fees. Dumping the time wasters. Now I have more time and more money and am quite enjoying the new horizon. Not quite sure that this was what Nicols et al had in mind when they introduced the RDR, but in the new world, it's looking after number one that counts.

report this

Blue Eyed Monster

Jan 24, 2013 at 15:10

@ Chartered Mark

"For years up till they launch of the RDR the FSA was banging out the message to the public. Seek Independant Advice and go to an IFA that charges fees. The public ignored the message. So the FSA made it easier for Joe, by removing the choice. A bit like the Fairy God mother, "You will go to the Fee charging IFA"

I think you are being a bit generous here. I cannot recall the FSA banging the drum for the IFA in any meaningful sense. Have you any examples?

report this

Ian Lees

Jan 24, 2013 at 15:30

Never mind the " marks out of 10 ", the execution would be sufficient ! Perhaps they could re introduce the tower of London and " Traitors Gate ", and follow in the footsteps of Sir Willaim Wallace . . . FREE DOMMMM

report this

Mark Haines

Jan 25, 2013 at 10:00

Dont rise to it lads having read about this man before(Bamford) he's just winding you all up, although i do think they would make a lovely couple!!!

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Long time coming: is the recovery here to stay?


Click here to watch a series of sponsored interviews with Jupiter's fund managers on the UK equity market.

Today's top headlines

More about this article:

Archive


Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet