The FCA seem to be pleased with the way firms have responded to previous RDR Thematic Reviews and the improvements seen in the disclosure of services and charges. However, not to be complacent, they remain concerned that a significant number of firms are still failing to disclose the total cost of ongoing services in cash terms, or not providing an approximation of how long services may take when quoting hourly rates.
As a school report would say ‘still room for improvement’.
They also state that ‘When creating and reviewing information explaining services and charges to consumers, there is scope for firms to further consider its prominence, clarity and accessibility (in addition to compliance with the detailed disclosure rules)’. So, is your disclosure clear and transparent, and are all advisers ensuring that clients fully understand your fees and charges?
The research highlighted the importance that customers place on the ongoing service reviews to ensure investments continue to be appropriate for their circumstances. It is essential therefore that you have a robust and deliverable review process.
The Thematic Review paper can be found here and detail on all three reviews to date here.
Be aware that the FCA has no hesitation in sanctioning firms. Recently, following the thematic reviews, one firm that had not sufficiently engaged with the changes that RDR requires was referred to their Enforcement and Financial Crime Division.



Regulatory Change – Proposed Changes to the Normal Minimum Pension Age
David Anderson Suitability 2021, Conduct, NMPA, normal minimum pension age, Pension, protected, protection, transfer, Update
We have made a change to ATEB Suitability following a recent regulatory development. What does this mean for me? Following the Draft Finance Bill published on 20 July 2021, we have updated the wording of our ‘Proposed changes to Normal Minimum Pension Age (NMPA)’ section within the ‘Retirement Advice’ page of the main […]