Tupicoffs managing director Neil Kendall will take the reins from Mr Rowe on 19 November 2014.
“Our transformation from an industry association to a professional association is complete. We now start a new journey – one as a professional community that’s united in its commitment to supporting Australians in securing a better financial future,” Mr Rowe said.
Mr Kendall said now is “not the time for a revolution” but rather a time to stay on course to ensure the FPA continues to build on the “hard work” it has been doing.
“We all want to know that we are creating a meaningful, positive difference in the lives of the client. There has been much talk to date about what defines ‘bad advice’. Our focus from now is very much on ‘good advice’,” Mr Kendall said.
Along with Mr Kendall’s appointment the FPA also announced the departure of board members Patrick Canion and Louise Lakomy who will be replaced by newly-elected board members Marisa Broome and Delma Newton.
The FPA also said current board member Matthew Brown has been re-elected and will continue on with his role.
Fair enough, they are effective in their process because they know how inefective the FOS system is with a systemic bias against financial service providers (FSPs). Financial Rescue are in rush to get to the FOS as, once there, they are almost guaranteed of getting a result. They use risk profiling as the easy mark. The comment from happy client is troubling, “won’t be successful on falling markets, let us show you how using risk profiling”.
Pretty good business using a system that gives no right of reply to the FSPs, who generally is not even privy to the conclusion reached against them, from a bias system allowed to make binding decisions up to $280K plus interest and cost, even higher if our ambulance chasers are savvy enough to split the claim. Do they act in the best interest of our industry, I think not. To have the head of the Financial Planning association as a director and owner, I think not also.
It is not illegal for Financial Rescue to make a healthy profit from their work. They don’t pretend to be a charity. Like anything, if there is a dollar to be made by performing a particular service then someone will fill that niche in the market. What’s wrong with them making a profit from coordinating complaints against advisers? And if they make a lot of money from it – then that just shows how effective they are at what they do.
Financial Rescue works both sides of the complaint process. Assisting and advising Advisers and/or clients.
They are trying to help fix what is a very very broken process at FOS at which truth, compliance and/or care is often wilfully disregarded. Dont shoot the messenger. I have known Neil for many years and i Trust him implicitly.
The uninformed comments here about Tupicoffs and Financial Rescue indicate a determined refusal to do any research before offering an opinion. Financial Rescue performs an important role assisting those who have been devastated by the worst kind of advice imaginable.
and here come the testimonials…
The risk profiling process is flawed yet it’s industry best practice. Work that one out of you will. Anyone can pick apart a risk profile to get a result. A 65 year old can still come out as Growth yet if they lose money FOS will say they should have been conservative. Tread carefully.
Financial Rescue did an excellent job for me (before I joined the industry as an Admin Assistant). I can’t praise them enough. I lost a lot of money in the GFC, with a bank adviser. Financial Rescue showed me how to complain based on my risk level as they said that claims for markets falling are unlikely to succeed. They really know their stuff and I would recommend them to anyone who has been sold bad share investments. Most people don’t know that you can get back money this way.
I agree. But if they raise a baseless allegation against you and encourage a client to complain out of mutual greed, meanwhile taking up literally hundreds of hours of your time as a small business practitioner defending an unnecessarily long and complex complaint then it is a different story. Anyone who says ‘if you’ve done nothing wrong you’ve got nothing to worry about’ obviously doesn’t know how the FP / FOS complaints process works.
lmao he’s not even the Chair yet! Look at all this Grade A1 hate! Did he personally take all of you to FOS or something?
Good luck Neil!
Well, I am glad I resigned from the FPA this year – it is proof that it is not a healthy organisation that can put people at the top who have conflicts. What a shame they own the CFP mark. I hope this new Chair has the guts to take on the real issues in our industry and not be a token head.
Great, watch the red tape & course flogging skyrocket. Look out advisers!
If you take up a job as chair of the FPA you can expect scrutiny and like others on here I would like to know why it’s okay for Kendall’s other business interest “Financial Rescue” to take a percentage cut on successful compensation claims and yet the financial planning business is promoted as strictly fee for service as that is non-conflicted. There are very valid concerns here.
As much as id love to think we are now a profession, i feel we are not there yet and wont be for some time. When some of our Large Licenees continue to retain ( or take on ) Advisers following Serious breaches (FOS determinations), we still have some major hurdles to overcome, before we can call ourselves a profession.
Yeah, you need to be sceptical. At its worst it’s just a self-serving form of advertising to be involved with the FPA. Maybe more representative of their own interest rather than those of the wider community of planners out there.
Tupicoffs are a firm that have urged their clients to try to ‘time the market’ on several occasions over the last few years. Very much against the solid message of spending ‘time in’ the markets to achieve the desired outcome. Selling out of the markets en masse is not a responsible approach & is contrary to our whole industry’s central message. I think it is just used as a way of keeping clients scared (and aware) of the volatility of markets and the need to have their hands held.
I totally agree. Financial Rescue were doing complaints work on a success basis – meaning that they ended up getting a percentage of any successful claim. That’s gotta be a conflict of interest if ever I have seen one. The ambulance chasers of the FP industry. And as planners, we know that way too many nefarious claims get paid out just because writing a cheque is easier than raising a defence. Any one of us could attack the soft underbelly of the FP industry for a buck. But only a few have been unscrupulous enough to choose to make profits by damaging their own industry. This is a dark day for the FPA. Just a bunch of weasels trying to appear holier than thou – as a form of marketing. Why can’t you just be good at your jobs instead?
Great, here we go, a person who established a money making venture, Financial Rescue, thats in the business to sue financial planners.
good luck with all planners being represented by the FPA