AMP shifts blame to aligned advisers

Yesterday, the royal commission made available the submissions it received in response to counsel assisting’s statements at the conclusion of the commission’s two-week hearings into financial advice.

AMP said in its response that while it accepts the case studies before the commission demonstrated inappropriate advice, AMP’s licensees were not at fault.

“AMP acknowledges that, in the case studies identified, its systems and processes have not prevented inappropriate advice being provided to clients. However, that does not mean that AMP’s advice licensees engaged in misconduct as submitted by counsel assisting,” the submission said.

The business said it “agrees that it is open for the commissioner to find that each of the three advisers, the subject of the case study, breached their statutory obligations”, adding that it was for the reasons noted by the commission that AMP removed the advisers from its network.

However, AMP said “no such finding is available” to indicate misconduct or breaches of statutory obligations on the part of the licensees.

“These statutory obligations are not absolute. A licensee’s obligations pursuant to these provisions must, as a matter of practicality, be a question of whether it has adequate processes and systems in place to achieve the desired outcome,” the submission said.

“The evidence in the case study shows, in relation to each of the three licensees, an example of one adviser providing inappropriate advice, and potentially breaching his or her statutory obligations.

“While these are serious matters which should be (and were) identified, investigated and escalated, they do not constitute grounds to find that AMPFP, Charter or Genesys contravened their statutory obligations.”

A full list of the submissions made to the royal commission can be read here: https://www.ifa.com.au/news/25505-royal-commission-round-two-responses-released