Small licensees fear PI slug

insurance compliance financial planning financial planning industry financial planning association financial planning firms treasury FPA life insurance

1 December 2006
| By Liam Egan |

The deadline for the financial planning sector to propose changes to the controversial wording of draft Corporations Act Regulation 7.6.02AAA fell yesterday (November 30), bringing down the curtain on its ability to influence the passage of the regulation into law by early next year.

It will introduce a mandatory professional indemnity (PI) insurance framework into the financial planning industry for the first time, requiring all licensees to have arrangements in place to enable them to pay any compensation claims that may be made against them.

The Financial Planning Association (FPA) is among a number of industry representative bodies believed to have submitted proposed changes to Federal Treasury, author of the draft regulation.

At the heart of industry’s concerns are both the wording of the draft and apparent contradictions between the wording of the draft and the wording of a written commentary by Treasury that accompanies the draft regulation.

Additional verbal reassurances by Treasury spokespersons recently over its intentions for the draft regulation appear to have failed to convince industry to accept that the draft wording would not potentially place impossibly onerous PI cover requirements on smaller, independently-owned licensees.

Financial planning firms that are connected to a bank or life insurance office, and where those organisations provide it with a guarantee, will not have to have the PI insurance requirement — thereby effectively exempting most of the larger financial planning licensees from the regulation.

The concerns are probably best encapsulated within a submission to Treasury by Perth-based financial services-specialist lawyer Mark Halsey, which was submitted with the support by the Association of Independently Owned Financial Planners.

Halsey calculated in his submission that compliance with the draft regulation could require some smaller, independently owned licensees to acquire professional indemnity cover “in the order of $50 million”.

His calculation is based on the draft regulation stating that licensees’ insurance must be “adequate, having regard to the highest possible liability that could arise in connection with all claims in respect of which the licensee could be found liable”.

“In a worst-case interpretation of the ‘highest possible liability’, using a licensee’s number of clients as a benchmark, you can calculate enormous levels of aggregate liability cover that would be required for even a very small licensee,” he said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

GG

So shareholders lose a dividend plus have seen the erosion of value. Qantas decides to clawback remuneration from Alan ...

2 months 2 weeks ago
Denise Baker

This is why I left my last position. There was no interest in giving the client quality time, it was all about bumping ...

2 months 2 weeks ago
gonski

So the Hayne Royal Commission has left us with this. What a sad day for the financial planning industry. Clearly most ...

2 months 2 weeks ago

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....

6 days 20 hours ago

Having divested its advice business in August, AMP is undergoing restructuring in at least four other departments amid a cost simplification program....

3 weeks 6 days ago

The Reserve Bank of Australia's latest interest rate announcement has left punters disheartened on Melbourne Cup Day....

5 days 19 hours ago