The Financial Services and Credit Panel has decided not to take action against two advisers in separate cases, one regarding failing to comply with CPD requirements and the other matter relating to personal advice to retail clients.
The FSCP’s Outcomes Register notes that a matter was referred to the Sitting Panel regarding Ms J “….due to concerns that the relevant provider had failed to comply with their continuing professional development requirements (i.e. complete 40 hours of CPD in the relevant areas during the year).”
The panel says Ms J gave it information and material which satisfied it that there were “…exceptional circumstances that led to the noncompliance, and that the relevant provider understood their CPD obligations.”
The panel decided not to take action against the relevant provider.
In a second recent case on the Outcomes Register, regarding Mr Z, the panel says a matter was referred to it “…due to concerns that the relevant provider contravened sections 946B, 961B(1) and 921E(3) of the Corporations Act 2001 in relation to personal advice given to two retail clients between October 2018 and September 2022 inclusive.”
The panel says it considered submissions from the relevant provider and decided to not to take any action.
Editors Note: Section 961B of the Corporations Act says the provider must act in the best interests of the client in relation to the advice and Section 921E of the Corporations Act requires financial advisers to comply with the Code of Ethics. Section 946B relates to a separate record of advice.
One of the frustrations with reading ASIC press releases about the latest action against poor advice (as distinct from action against criminal offences i.e. fraud) is that the statements are usually couched in legalese and PR spin, so that practising advisers are left asking many questions without answers.The typical statement from the Commissioner tends not to add any value to the debate
To be truly effective there should be considerable detail on the alleged offence so that learnings can be gained by practising advisers. We shouldn't be waiting until your AFSL gets the news and then interprets it to their benefit.
Here we have the FSCP issuing press releases which hint at offences but in practice provide no learnings. Surely it's possible for the FSCP to provide us with significantly more detail so that we can obtain some benefit from its existence.
Comments are closed.