The adviser spoke to Good Returns on the condition that his name and that of the QFE he operates under wouldn't be published.

He said some industry peers had reacted with surprise when told of his decision to be a QFE adviser rather than a registered or authorised financial adviser: "Some of them look at you as if you've just grown two heads."

But the adviser said that under his QFE, with whom he had an existing relationship going back several years, he has been able to "carry on doing business the way I did before" instead of having to become an AFA or drop the investment/KiwiSaver side of the business and become an RFA.

He said there were "obvious attractions" such as not having to pay the costs associated with registration and authorisation, but other advisers he had spoken to had misperceptions about what becoming a QFE adviser involves.

"They think there must be some restriction on what you can do in terms of business but there really isn't.  The QFE agreement I've got allows me to deal in all the areas I have traditionally operated in... why would I want to pay $500 to a dispute resolution scheme?"

Despite this he said being part of a QFE is no easy ride, as QFE advisers are "probably more closely monitored than RFAs: AFAs have audits from the FMA and we have audits from our QFE."

And other advisers aren't the only ones confused about QFEs, he said.

"The biggest issue has been with product suppliers who say 'you're not on the [financial service providers] register, what is your registration number?'  A couple of them have scratched their heads when I've told them I don't have one."