- Yes (48%)
- No (43%)
- Not sure (8%)
The release by ASIC last week of a draft information sheet heralding the removal of the exemption of claims handling activities from the definition of ‘financial service’ forms the basis for our latest poll.
As we’ve reported this week, Banking Royal Commissioner, Kenneth Hayne, stated in his final report that “…claims handling is is as much the provision of a financial service as any other financial service.”
The Government has now introduced legislation that will remove the claims handling exemption and we’re keen to know what you think about this move.
ASIC explains that on passage of the Government’s Bill, “…persons providing claims handling and settling services will need to be covered by an Australian Financial Services licence, and the general conduct obligations under section 912A of the Corporations Act 2001… will apply.”
However, we note that the list of those industry participants ASIC says will need to obtain an AFS licence for claims handling and settling or be authorised by another AFS licensee does not include financial advisers who handle claims on behalf of their clients (see: AFS Licence for Claims Handling).
We’re interested to hear your thoughts on the pending legislative change and whether you support the need for an AFS licence in order to provide these services in future.
Tell us what you think and we’ll report back next week…
Qualified Advisers and AFSL’s – No additional licensing requirements needed.
Others who are not qualified advisers under an AFSL – Yes they should be required to hold an AFSL and act in best interests of claimants incl. needing to document their claims handling recommendations, completing an affordability assessment of the fees they will charge the claimant, they should also complete a professional year under supervision of an experienced adviser and need to complete CPD each year to keep up to date with the rapid pace of change in life insurance these days.
You are certainly correct about doing the 40 hours ! Whats good for the “goose” is good for the ‘gander” the saying goes. I just don’t see the Legal Fraternity wanting to do anything like continued education in this area. All they want apparently from the legally led claims i have witnessed is to strip the client of 30% { and more } of their payout. And its never “free” no win no payment still has some issues attached like stationary payments other assistant costs etc ? Never ever NIL cost.
Outrageous isn’t it. Yes they need an ASFL and the continued monitoring education and legal requirements that are required to keep it. Watch them receive a “carv” out here .
Viewing the results of the poll so far suggests advisers may be confused about the question. Although it may seem clear to some, may I suggest a rewording of the question – Does claims handling need an AFS license?
Comments are closed.