Over 170 advisers have faced disciplinary action since 2015
New analysis from Wealth Data has revealed that some 175 advisers have been affected by disciplinary actions (DAs) over the last nine years, with the most occurring during 2019.
While the number stood at 11 in 2015, it more than doubled the following year to 24 and stood at 26 in 2017 and 2018.
In 2019, the number rose sharply to see 34 advisers face disciplinary actions.
“In percentage terms the numbers are very low. For example, in 2019 the average number of advisers was 25,712 and with 34 DAs that is only 0.13 per cent of the advisers or 1 in every 756 advisers,” said Wealth Data founder, Colin Williams.
“Given the level of scrutiny post the Royal Commission, these figures may seem very low.”
In 2020, the number fell to 17 but then saw a gradual rise back up again to 21 in 2021.
Last year, 12 advisers faced disciplinary actions.
The research house also looked into the number of DAs that did not have an end date, most of which occurred when the adviser had been permanently banned.
“The data supplied by ASIC is often a little vague on this. The total number is 48. Not shown are the number of advisers that are current, this is only at seven,” Williams noted.
For 2023, the number stood at four.
“When reviewing media releases from ASIC for ‘advisers’ there are many more than four. What often happens is that a media release relates to a case that commenced pre-2023. Therefore, we can expect numbers for 2023 to keep building through the years post 2023,” he explained.
In terms of key adviser movements, the net change of advisers was down by four. It was a busy week with 92 advisers being appointed or resigning.
The growth of micro AFSLs continued, with six new licensees commencing.
Three licensee owners grew by net two, including Insignia who gained advisers from Beyond Bank Australia who have agreed to provide new opportunities to Bridges, a licensee owned by Insignia.
Centrepoint was also up by two, including one adviser coming across from Affinia which is now part of Count Group.
24 licensee owners were up by net one, including Findex, Count Group, Diverger, and Capstone.
Looking at losses, ANZ Bank lost four advisers and all are showing ceased.
Beyond Bank was down by six after commencing with Bridges as their advice provider.
Three licensee owners were down by two each, including Clime and Morgan Stanley.
A long tail of 25 licensee owners down by one each, including AMP Group, Evans Dixon, Picture Wealth, and PSK.
AUTHOR
Rhea Nath
Recommended for you
ASIC data shows the number of smaller AFSLs with less than $50 million in revenue has increased by 25 per cent in the past year, but the regulator believes they are still under reporting breaches.
Former financial adviser and Coalition backbencher Bert van Manen has introduced a bill in Parliament, building on Michelle Levy’s good advice duty and calling for SOAs to be scrapped.
Following its recent partnership with Otivo, Colonial First State has now announced an arrangement with Viridian Advisory to offer unadvised members with one-off, topic-based financial advice.
Insignia Financial has made four appointments, including three who have joined from TAL, to lead strategy and innovation in its retirement solutions for the MLC brand.
"Last year, 12 advisers faced disciplinary actions".
The math therefore is 12 / 16,000 = 0.075% Advisers received disciplinary action in 2022. Seems like a very small percentage.
I would like to know how many of these so called 'advisors' were in fact advisors and not someone pertaining to be one but really were just a fox in sheep's clothing. Our industry gets tainted so often by spruikers calling themselves advisors yet they are nothing but a con-person trying to swindle people out of their hard earned money.
Thank you for publishing this highly relevant data. Advisers should be seeing the PI insurance premiums on a declining trend. It would be learning to see data %s on (1) conflicts of interest (2) SMSF related (3) other forms of inappropriate advice? Also, the industry professional association should be encouraging restorative justice instead of banning as a last resort, because when an adviser gets banned, there is no program to assist their clients recover, which is [Minister Jones] the consumer is at the core. The adviser gets banned, but if a new adviser takes over, the new adviser's PI insurance premium escalates seriously. If ASIC applied restorative justice when there was no reckless illegality, then the resorted reeducated adviser becomes a high compliance advocate, with the consumer at the core.
A high figure but then again a low figure. Nevertheless not a god number for the financial advice industry but a good number for the regulators.
Pwc should blow these numbers out of the water..... Perhaps advisers are not the biggest area of corruption?