News Review: Advice
Protection providers must help advisers by
Duncan Crocker, managing director, Legal & General Network
there has often been something of a tense relationship between product providers and advisers when it comes to direct interaction with customers. i have lost count of the amount of times i have heard conversations between an inbound existing Legal & general protection customer and a member of our call centre that draws attention to a potentially fractious situation. in a recent case one of
our helpful call centre staff in cardiff fielded an inquiry from a customer that had a genuine need. they were moving house and wanted to increase their sum assured and add critical illness cover for their partner. our first reaction was in line with the standard industry response and it was politely suggested that the customer may want to contact the financial adviser that originally advised them on the product purchase. However, after the second attempt to point the customer in this direction was rebuffed it became crystal clear this was not something they were prepared to do. in this case they had not had any contact with their adviser for many years and did not want to go back to their iFa. they preferred to simply “get the changes done” and as you might expect with the customer unequivocal in their wish and showing no signs
of budging we proceeded to comply fully.
Client loyalty this raises some interesting points for the advisory industry as a whole. Perhaps the default reaction by some of the advisers reading this article would be to feel suspicious about the motives of the insurance company in that instance and even to feel that in this situation the insurance company may be seeking to ‘steal’ the client from the adviser. However, the
flaw
unearthed here isn’t with the provider. it is much broader than that. this particular adviser had been unable to establish a bond of trust with their client by articulating a proposition of lifetime advice and backing it up with further contact and offerings. Such a degradation of duty is a bigger issue than any thoughts that a product provider would seek to steal a customer as the way things stand at the moment such an attitude is more likely to have a negative impact on the work we are all trying to do.
While it would be unrealistic to suggest that
10 mortgage introducer NOVEMBER 2011
our motives do not differ from time to time it is fair to say that on the vast majority of occasions in cases like this providers are trying to provide service for the client rather than stealing the client.
Common goal our industry must have an overarching long term goal to help drive the perception that we are indeed a professional advisory sector not just a bunch of self- interested sales people. We should look after our customers together and aim to provide them with lifetime advice, to be there when they need us and available when they don’t. creating such a perception would catapult our sector towards professionalism and away from purely selling. it would also show the naysayers that we are indeed working for the client and not just for ourselves.
Stop infighting as an industry we need to shake out of our parochial malaise. it just isn’t good enough any more to sell to someone once, pocket the initial commission and walk away. if that is what happens
then no wonder the customer seeks a new adviser the next time they need help, and no wonder initial commission gets reclaimed from the first adviser after they have discharged all the initial effort to provide the advice. equally it’s no wonder
the business cash flow and adviser income is ruined. in short, such practice will simply become unacceptable in a post retail distribution review wealth market. as an industry we need to work together to position ourselves as a force for good in society and restore the somewhat damaged reputation we have in the eyes on the man and woman on the street.
Plugging the gap recently the protection gap in the uK was estimated at £2.4tn which is a massive figure which ever way you look at it. it is the job of providers and advisers alike to work together to fill this gap both from a moral and financial standpoint. if we replace the paranoia
with co-operation then we can show that our sector is indeed a force for good in society.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68