News

Financial advisers – the public perception

Wednesday 27th of April 2011

Overall however, the results of the survey into the public perception of financial services providers makes worrying reading for advisers.

Usage of financial advisers has slipped from 10% to 7% of New Zealanders, and "public confidence in New Zealand's financial services to help them grow and protect their wealth has dipped sharply."

Mike Heath, the RaboDirect general manager, said the overall results should be of concern to advisers.

"For 2009 through to 2010 financial advisers had a net positive confidence measure and that's dropped down to net negative for the first time, so I think the trend is definitely the most alarming thing I'd take away from this."

"If we go back to August 2009 net positive 14, February 2010 it dropped down to net positive 13 but then it jumped to net positive 23 at September 2010, so its kind of bounced around a little bit whereas if you look at banks over the same period confidence consistently increased. Credit unions and building societies dropped off modestly over those periods," he said.

"Out of all the sectors where there was the biggest spring it was definitely in terms of financial advisers over when we first did the survey in August 2009 through to March this year."

Heath said he believed media coverage around finance company collapses had damaged financial advisers.

"People who don't use them picked up on the negative sentiment in the media and comments and experience of the past few years," he said.

The survey included a number of findings with regard to the perception of financial advisers.

Of the respondents, 5% said they had strong confidence in financial advisers, with 19% having confidence. However, 9% strongly disagreed they had confidence in advisers and 13% ‘somewhat disagree.'

When it came to whether people considered fees reasonable for the advice provided, only 2% strongly agreed, with 16% ‘somewhat agreeing.'

The largest percentages, both at 30%, either didn't know or neither agreed or disagreed, while 7% strongly disagreed adviser fees were reasonable.

The survey also broke down questions of integrity, fees and confidence across those who currently use a financial adviser, lapsed users and those who had never used an adviser.

In a plus for the industry, in each case those using an adviser ranked them more positively.

On integrity, 57% of current users believed advisers acted with fairness and integrity, falling to 41% for lapsed users and 20% for those who had never used an adviser.

The highest score, at 69%, was from current users agreeing advisers provided good information to help make investment decisions.

The lowest score among users was on whether fees are reasonable, with 49% agreeing.

Health said he believes the new regulatory environment will improve the public perception of the wider financial services sector and advisers.

The September 2010 Confidence Index found 30% ‘agree' and 4% ‘strongly agree' that the financial services market would be better regulated in three years time.

"I think the regulations will help. It just shows there's some more rigour and structure around the industry. I think that's definitely going to help boost confidence."

Comments (3)
John Milner
Phil the full legislation does not kick in until 1st July. Like other naive advisers you seem to have an expectation of clients instantly becoming aware of the legislative requirements of advisers. Rome was not built in a day and turning around the reputation of our industry as a whole will sadly take years.
0 0
13 years ago

W K
@keith. totally agree with you. i've suggested to simon power for advisors to use the appropriate designation on their name cards, where every man in the street will know exactly what services one advices. Example: - (name) insurance/risks (life & health) advisor/broker - (name) investment advisor - (name) financial planner - (name) risks & mortgage broker etc, etc, etc. the term "financial advisor/planner" should not be used by anyone, except a qualified & registered financial planner. i've mentioned before, i suspect the people who set up the regulations understand very little or nothing about financial planning.
0 0
13 years ago

Austin Fisher
Sorry to hear that Jack - but I think you do touch on a good central point. Right now, people don't know what financial advisers *are* - the term is very broad. The regulations will help clarify what a financial adviser is - and it is up to us to tell clients what kind of advice we can give under that heading. A friend-of-a-friend recently quizzed me very extensively on KiwiSaver and then went into all kinds of other areas. I told him that we were straying into "personal" advice territory and asked him if he had a financial adviser. He smiled broadly and replied that he did have an adviser and declared that he was a "bloody genius" when it came to money. There's nothing he doesn't know. The adviser had simply told him that KiwiSaver was a mug's game. He then told me that all of the adviser's property investments had tanked and the adviser was now bankrupt. But he remains a great bloke - and, again, a bloody genius when it comes to money. We still have a mountain to climb here.
0 0
13 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.