Wealth Professional forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Notify me of new replies via email
Wealth Professional | 18 Feb 2016, 09:19 AM Agree 0
Wealth Professional talks to an industry expert about the problems facing the sector
  • Arthur Salzer | 18 Feb 2016, 10:45 AM Agree 0
    I can't disagree with John on this issue.
  • Planner | 18 Feb 2016, 10:49 AM Agree 0
    I agree that the industry does need a stricter standard of regulation and that designating planning as a profession would go a long way to acheiving that. I myself hold the CFP designation and would love to see this as the minimum standard to use the planner title. I don't however see this happening, many of the largest employers of 'Financial Planners' are the chartered banks who have many individuals holding a designation that isn't the CFP. I find it hard to beleive that there won't be signifigant lobbying efforts from the big 5 to 'grandfather' or accept a lesser standard because of this fact.
  • Gina Macdonald | 18 Feb 2016, 01:16 PM Agree 0
    The association that represents the highest level of financial planners in Canada is the IAFP. Planners that have gone to the effort to write the R.F.P. exam and abide by their code of ethics are the top tier.

    There are so many versions of financial planner out there, the consumer is confused by the alphabet soup.
  • Russ | 18 Feb 2016, 07:52 PM Agree 0
    What about the R.F.P. designation offered by the Institute of Advanced Financial Planners? Although less well-known, I've read some suggestions that it is the more rigorous credential.
  • sunil | 20 Feb 2016, 09:20 PM Agree 0
    I am really surprised to know that any one can call him or her self a Financial planner without any need for any minimum qualifications. I think the govt of Canada IA playing with the future of its population.
  • Jim Zoellner | 21 Feb 2016, 09:00 AM Agree 0
    Yes I agree with him 100%. All it takes to call your self a Financial Planner is to pass the Life Insurance exam to get a life license and suddenly you become a Financial Planner, a Wealth Manager a Senior Financial Planner, or what ever you would like to call yourself. It is not fair to the public that this is allowed to go on. We are dealing with clients and investors financial life blood and should have extensive experience or education. The the public, has to be confused, they have no idea if a person has qualifications to advise on money matters
    or investments. When one with little or no experience or knowledge of the planning process can call themselves Financial
    Planners the public is at risk. I wholly agree that FP needs better regulation. I believe this is a much larger problem than fees or trailer commissions.

  • Gerry | 21 Feb 2016, 03:17 PM Agree 0
    I believe CPA's have equal status as CFP's with respect to assisting people in planning their futures.
  • John Page | 03 Mar 2016, 06:09 PM Agree 0
    I would respectfully disagree with Gerry. I have trained some CPA's to do financial planning. In fact, I am presently teaching a class of 6. If you took a poll of my class, I think they might disagree with you, except for the one that is also an ICPM. They are knowledgeable and learn quickly. They will make excellent financial advisors who can help people prepare for the future.

  • Debbie | 07 Mar 2016, 07:05 PM Agree 0
    Re: “The FPSC does a good job on enforcement, advocacy, education and continuing education for CFP registrants.”
    Are you kidding me! Read their enforcement statistics and cases.
    Their enforcement is non existent and reads like a bad joke
  • Kathy | 09 Mar 2016, 10:51 AM Agree 0
    I have been in financial planning for almost 30 years, this article could have written almost as long ago. Things have changed but oh so slowly. I started in this field understanding I had to obtain my R.F.P. to practice and have maintained it since. My employer expected it. The CFP came later and what Quebec did is great... More than an advocate, the various organizations need is to want this professional so badly that they agree to come to terms with it, put the client first (as planners are expected to do), set aside their egos and to move forward.
  • Felix | 10 Mar 2016, 10:30 AM Agree 0
    I noticed and personally know a lot of planners, disregard if they have CFP or other designations, using the planning technique (always free) to attract clients, with the only objective "to sell products", earning comparably commission, fee or trailer, that far exceed if the financial plan can charge by fee alone.

    How much a Bay Street M&A lawyer charge? $800/hour? Normal corporate lawyer charge about $300-$400/hour. With a half a million $ portfolio client, say charging 1% a year, the client has to pay $5000 a year, and for a 70% split will give the planner $3500 a year. Using the same rate can eligible the client to chat with a corporate lawyer for 16 hours, or adequate to pay for 2 average condo corporation's annual audit fee. A lot of small to mid size CA firm, charge the same rate for their 5M< clients, bookkeeping, compilation of financial statement, corporate tax plus tax advice for the same amount a year! Did anyone really believe a financial plan did worth a client pays $5000 per year?

    Unless the planning industry can restrict planner by charging their service in hourly base or plan base fee only like what lawyers and accountants does, and strip the "marketing" cloth off the planning side, financial planning will never get respect from the public.
  • Jim Zoellner | 11 Mar 2016, 09:02 AM Agree 0
    The financial institutions need to take the lead here. They allow the untrained and unskilled to hold themselves out as Financial Planners or what ever they like. I cannot hold myself out as a lawyer or a doctor but in the financial area it is okay to hold yourself out as you please. No wonder the industry gets little if any respect.
  • Mark Hebert | 11 Mar 2016, 11:26 AM Agree 0
    Agreed! Its is long overdue and there is only one designation that is recognized globally the CFP.
    All the others should not be recognized at all.
  • Planner | 11 Mar 2016, 11:38 AM Agree 0
    @ Felix
    I'm not opposed to planning added as a value add for advisors managing money on a fee based model. As a client I'd expect that I would receive a financial plan, estate, tax advice and ongoing communication as part of the fee paid to manage my portfolio. I find it very hard to beleive that I should pay a % of assets to an advisor to do a handful of trades per year - especially considering many in the industry are moving towards in house wraps/managed solutions anyway. I don't think the problem lies in the 'bait with a FREE plan' & reap product fees, but instead to those advisors/planners that work on this model without a consistant strategy of how to disseminate timely advice and planning to their clients. As with any industry there are many 'bad apples' that tarnish the reputation of the entire industry. I think with the increased regulation/client disclosure that is upon us you need to prove to your clients each and every year that they are actually receiving value for money - including planning as a part of that offering encompasses a large part of that value.
  • TWH | 14 Mar 2016, 02:02 PM Agree 0
    Wealth Management and Wealth Accumulation strategies start at HOME and I do mean home which is why Independent (non-bank owned/controlled) advice is needed. Allowing a Mortgage Lender to also provide unbiased Wealth Management advice is so absurd it must be questioned why governments have not acted.

    Loaning mortgage funds on 39% GDS to high credit score consumers leaves ZERO available to used in any Financial Plan. When Canadians have no funds to invest why do they need an FP? Banks gain control, FPs lose jobs and Canadians are financially damaged.

    When are you folks going to step up with one voice and resolve this issue through a pro-active education of the public?

  • Jim | 14 Mar 2016, 05:08 PM Agree 0
    I am very out spoken and passionate about this issue. I believe the biggest fraud in this industry is allowing anyone to call themselves a FP a Wealth Manager or Wealth Consultant at their whim and fancy. It is not honesty to the public. We need to be. We talk about eliminating fraud in this industry; then let us be the instigators and demand more professionalism from ourselves and the institutions and tell the public the truth.
Post a reply