ASIC’s first snare in new super campaign
A Tasmanian financial planner has become the first scalp in the corporate watchdog’s new super switching campaign, after not giving his clients statements of advice (SOAs).
Brendan Moore of Hobart, an authorised representative of Financial Services Partners, appeared in the Hobart Magistrates Court charged with four counts of failing to provide a SOA before ‘switching’ his client’s superannuation funds.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) claimed that Moore failed to give SOAs to four of his clients during September and October last year.
Moore has been bailed to reappear in the Hobart Magistrates Court on June 8, 2005.
ASIC’s super switching campaign began in December last year to monitor the advice and disclosure provided by financial planners.
ASIC says it will announce broader findings of the campaign shortly.
“ASIC will be acting to ensure that consumers are provided with appropriate disclosures about the implications of switching superannuation funds. We will be vigilant in monitoring financial services providers, and will take action if they fail to meet their significant obligations under the law,” ASIC executive director of enforcement Jan Redfern said.
To ensure authorised representatives are meeting their obligations under the impending choice of fund regime, ASIC also released late last week details of a second shadow shopping campaign that will start next July, to coincide with commencement of the new legislation.
Recommended for you
ASIC has cancelled the AFSL of a Perth financial services firm following payments to its clients by the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort after a failed managed investment scheme.
Bravura chief executive Andrew Russell has announced he will be stepping down from the company, just under two years after his appointment.
Financial advice businesses with a younger, wealthier client base are enjoying higher valuations and increased attention from potential buyers than those with older clients.
A financial advice firm has been penalised $11 million in the Federal Court for providing ‘cookie cutter advice’ to its clients and breaching conflicted remuneration rules.
