Latest on Call For Random Adviser Audits

2
Do you support the call for ASIC to conduct random audits of 20 per cent of life insurance advisers over a three-year period?
  • No (67%)
  • Yes (28%)
  • Not sure (4%)

In the wake of the AFA’s damning assessment this week of the report handed down by the PJC Inquiry into Life Insurance, we’re keeping our latest poll running for one more week (see: AFA Slams PJC Report).

AFA Chief, Phil Kewin…’amazed’ that the PJC have called for random audits on risk businesses

Amongst a raft of criticisms of the PJC’s report, AFA CEO, Phil Kewin, said the Association was amazed at the Committee’s call for more adviser compliance audits, “…given there is no new evidence or reporting referred to other than what was previously available that has led to the significant and sweeping reforms of the Life Insurance Framework and Professional Standards Legislation.”

Instead of conducting these random audits on risk advice businesses, the AFA also suggested any such activity should focus on those advisers who are suspected of doing the wrong thing and that ASIC would be able to ascertain who those people were from information that is currently available to the regulator.

As we go to print, however, just under three advisers in ten (28 per cent) have indicated they support the PJC’s call for random audits. So, while the majority (68 per cent) have rejected this call, there is still a reasonable group in favour.

Where do you stand on this issue? Tell us what you think as our poll remains open for another week…



2 COMMENTS

  1. One of the positives that “could” come out of this is to show what a con job 413 was that led to the LIF. Only 200 files reviewed by targeted advisers. The problem is though that the same organisation that undertook the first con job will be same undertaking the random audits.

Comments are closed.