The surreal regulations that get financial planners in a rage

Pablo Picasso, the celebrated Spanish painter and pioneer of the Cubist movement, had this advice:

“Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.”

Señor Picasso might have thought again, one suspects, had he come across the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Because Britain’s financial services regulator is almost always unimpressed by transgressions, regardless of the artistry applied to the rule-breaking. Which makes it all the more frustrating when you don’t agree with its long list of dos and don’ts.

So which regulations does the UK’s financial planning community find a little – ahem – surreal? We took to Twitter to ask you.

Dominic Thomas, from Solomon’s IFA, kicked us off with a long list:

MIFID2 Quarterly valuations encourage short term thinking when long term is required. UNREGULATED products (BS)… RMAR returns seem utterly pointless. Inability to use FCA logo… crikey it just goes on and on

— Dominic Thomas (@solomonsifa) March 19, 2019

Ah yes – the FCA logo. Phillip Bray from The Yardstick Agency explained that the regulator does not allow its use on adviser websites or marketing materials.

“Assume it’s to stops scammers using it to legitimise themselves,” he said.  “Be good to see the FCA create a graphic or icon which links through to the planner/adviser/firm’s page on the FCA Register. Easy to do (assuming they don’t take the Register down for 12 months). Chances of them doing it? Zero.”

A pessimistic picture of the potential for progress being painted there. (And try saying that after a mind-numbing afternoon with the FCA Handbook!)

James Tarry, from Scottsdale Moneywise, was next, bemoaning “Meaningless key facts illustrations?”. He was quickly followed by David Penney, from Penney, Ruddy & Winter, who had a more technical gripe with the old RU64 regulation. That’s been now translated into COBS 19.2.2R (1), in case you were wondering. Oh, you weren’t? Okay.

But the most visceral anger, although we suspect a little artistic exaggeration, came from Martin Bamford.

The need for PI insurance AND capital adequacy AND FSCS levies. One form of consumer protection done well would be better than three expensive ones done badly. pic.twitter.com/MdkvcwIATg

— Martin Bamford (@martinbamford) March 19, 2019

So what rules and regulations get you in rage?

Wish to find what this Advice Tech company can do for your business? Book a Demo with us, free of charge.

Subscribe here to our updates and the “Why I…” series!

Article written with the brilliant help of our dear friends at Foco.