Speaking to ifa in response to recent comments from readers, Dover adviser relations manager Peter Thompson said many within the industry did not understand the company’s model, and that some contested its adherence to the independent label.
“There’s a lot of debate at the moment about who should be able to use the definitions of independently-owned,” Mr Thompson said.
“Dover is only paid by our advisers, we receive commissions for the advisers if they wish to receive commissions for insurances, but we pay that money back 100 per cent to the adviser in full. We don’t have any one product who pays us, so therefore Dover, the AFSL, meets that definition.
“There’s a lot of our competitors that are still debating this topic and because they actually are paid in some way by a product even though they don’t like to admit it, they can’t call themselves independently-owned. They’re acting like a pseudo-institution anyway.”
Additionally, Mr Thompson dismissed claims that Dover was a “dealer group of last resort”, and advisers that Dover has licensed after having “been shown the door” by institutions typically left their previous licensee because they haven’t met the KPIs and other requirements imposed on them by those licensees.
“We’re a dealer group for advisers who might not necessarily meet the requirements of an institution that requires new business to be written year on end,” he said.
“For advisers that want to write 150 SOAs a year and be very active within financial planning and potentially with those kinds of high volumes, maybe cut corners, we’re not the dealer group for them – and there’s no incentive for us to take on that much work anyway.”
Mr Thompson also agreed with comments made by Steve Prendeville of Forte Asset Solutions and that screening advisers is critical for dealer groups.
“[Steve] makes an interesting point, and hence why we do a lot of reviews of advice that comes through the business,” Mr Thompson said.
“It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever that a dealer group would complete an audit once a year, which includes three SOAs, identify issues within those SOAs and then be ignorant to the fact that those issues aren’t also occurring in every other SOA, close that file and then wait another 12 months to review another three files.
“It doesn’t help the client, it doesn’t help the adviser, and it doesn’t help the licensee, so that’s the way we try to mitigate the potential Trojan horse from within.”
I have been with Dover for 2 years now, and I am happy and contented with Dover’s overall philosophy. Happy to chat with anyone who wishes to understand their model better.
and get a $10,000 spotters fee… classy Dover..
Dover is a great dealer group. I have been with them for the best part of 18 months now and I don’t plan on ever leaving. Their compliance is simply the best of any dealer group I have been with. You have your SOAs checked over by a lawyer and that gives me the confidence that it has met the best interest tests. Sometimes compliance will throw up other ideas to you, it is about getting the best for the client.
Really disappointing to see others on her bad mouthing a group they don’t know anything about. A lot of dealer groups barely check SOAs and I would hate for ASIC to look at your SOAs and declare them to be non-compliant all because you didn’t have a second set of eyes look over them.
I’m a relatively new entrant into planning with a strong financial services background. Multiple degrees and a decent head on my shoulders. I also know how money works. I had a look at many of the dealer groups, and Dover was the only one that would allow me to invest my clients funds how I wish (that is, ETFs and direct). This was a thorough process and I considered many but wanted to pursue the option that I felt best for my clients.
Yes, every SoA is vetted in house and I think its just brilliant. Even the best of us do typo’s and why not get a second pair of eyes on your SoA? I tell my clients about the whole process and they feel more confident that there’s many eyes checking over my recommendations. I feel this a competitive advantage for my business having a qualified lawyer sign off on my recommendations.
It’s a little disappointing to see that many hide behind the keyboard as “anon” and decide to give any dealer group a bad rap. Its critical that if we are going to make planning a profession, we move on from bad mouthing each other, join forces, and show the advised and non-advised alike what we are all about: making a positive impact in people’s lives.
Well said
Shame you didn’t look further afield, Anonymous, as there’s plenty of licensees who’ll allow what you want. Like all licensees, they will be judged by the behaviours (past and present….) of their advisers.
This just confirms my concerns, why does a relatively new entrant think they can invest better than an expert research house???
Ive been at it for 20 years and have seen the shit hit the fan more than once, for that very reason I am very vanilla in my approach. add your value in strategy not investment selection as just about any one can pick a fund or ETF and if you tie yourself to investments and returns, you will be losing clients in droves in a market downturn
let me allay your concerns. Terry recommends direct equities, he doesn’t like off the plan properties in this climate because they will suffer a reduction in value so they are high risk.
He says, “why should fund managers get the fee”, he recommends the financial planners (particularly Dover appointed ones with RG146) recommend a direct equity portfolio and review the client every 6 months. we don’t need a research house. we use BT’s margin lending securities guides for our APL on approved securities to recommend. we don’t even need to pay for research or royalties to BT
my spelling is very bad but da fully bi-lingual staff in Vietnam fix it all up for me
I don’t even need to pay my dealer group fees i get an interest free 12 month period.
if you have a Ph.D. in finance or bunch of other masters degrees in finance tough luck. the law of the land says RG146 is sufficient so be a big boy and suck it up.
John West rejects Dover collects…..
I [quote=Roger Stannard]It seems you can find a lawyer embedded in almost any business these days. What do lawyers know about financial advice? Come to to think of what do regulators or they people they consult with such as FSC members or dealer group heads know about financial advice? God help us.[/quote] Your line of argument sets you on a perilous path. To use your logic, one might ask what a financial planner would know about the law? Unfortunately for you, there’s a litany of bannings, disqualifications and actions that answer that question. It’s best to avoid generalisations and reductionist responses.
The lawyers at Dover are all qualified financial planners too…
Dover single question application form: “ Do you have a pulse?” Yes/No?
Or the alternative question… can you fog a mirror??
A number of years ago, whilst working as a dealer group manager, I received a call from an ex Storm adviser. I politely declined to appoint him. A week later he turned up at Dover. Maybe he was misunderstood at Storm, and Terry decided to give him a second chance.
Terry has also recently been complaining about the cost of PI. PI is cheap, till you get a claim.
Why are you posting as anonymous? Coward.
Why aren’t you psoting your surname ? Coward.
It seems you can find a lawyer embedded in almost any business these days. What do lawyers know about financial advice? Come to to think of what do regulators or they people they consult with such as FSC members or dealer group heads know about financial advice? God help us.
Did those lawyers give Peter any advice around ASIC’s position on use of the term ‘independently-owned’ or words of like import?