bI’ve seen it a few times now on Instagram and it is the epitome of ambulance chasing. A ‘law firm’ that has already claimed hundreds of thousands in compensation from SJP and is saying - “If you’ve ever had any advice, ever, then get in touch and it’s virtually guaranteed we’ll get your money back."
Now, I’ve been as frustrated as the next finance professional at the way SJP have seemingly ignored or circumvented the rules that everyone else has had to abide by since 2012. And I do genuinely think allowing it to happen has reflected appallingly on the regulator at that time.
However, adverts like this leave me feeling very perturbed. Firstly, it inevitably tars the entire advice industry with the same brush, which is far from fair. Secondly, depending on the process this company and others like it follow, there’s a chance it results in a huge increase in FOS claims. Bear in mind that just 0.09% of advice clients complained to FOS in 2021; a substantial increase in that would of course see an increase in the fees that ALL regulated firms pay, not just the one big firm that has driven the increase.
Thirdly, the argument from a client’s perspective about SJP has always been that it is down to the end client to decide what they believe is of value. MKC have linked their adviser bonuses to the reviews of clients, via the VouchedFor Elevation platform, since inception which, in the independent space, feels like a bold, norm-changing move. However, if the same ethos was applied to SJP advisers and their clients they’d probably not see a dip in bonuses as we all know - the clients love them. I’ve had conversations with them myself; the Kool-Aid is addictive.
Of course, client reviews and love are, to an extent, subjective. They lose some of their merit if the client can’t fairly assess value because they don’t actually know what they’re paying (cough, RDR, cough). In addition, even if they do, a review and rating is useful if it has a benchmark. So, a client testing out 10 advice firms and then ranking them in order of preference based on their experience would be phenomenally powerful. But, of course, it’s impossible for clients to literally test out financial planning across 10 advice firms, so the review is normally that this firm and/or adviser have done great vs. um, just not getting advice. Sometimes it’s also because they’ve had an amazing service – but – should that not just be a given in any service industry in 2023?
Anyway, I was already pondering all of this and then of course they made statements about removing exit fees (even though they’re not removing exit fees) and I haven’t yet read a better review on this news than the one linked below. Does this week’s news make the ambulance chasers rub their hands with glee – perceiving an admission of ‘fault’ by SJP and thus making their lives easier? Or does it take some of the wind out of their sales and somewhat diminish the good/evil theatre they’ve been playing out? I guess time will tell.
Along with the news of Monzo investments going live this week (yes, I am one of the “chosen” ones – I shall provide musings in due course) one thing is for certain, we cannot ignore this has been a big week in the finance space and the repercussions will be playing out for some time to come.
Additional links are my podcast with moneyinfo which was a super interesting discussion (finance really has some progress to do!) and, while we’re talking reviews, now’s your chance to ask your clients to give you a VouchedFor rating to see where you benchmark against your peers (and maybe get some promo out of it when they start sharing it all over the newspapers!).
Good news guys, it’s almost the end of Stop-tober! The concept of which means nothing to me personally, of course. But, if you are trying to stick on the booze-free wagon this month then you might wanna give Sentia a try. I’ve got some, tried it and… it’s interesting.
Have a wonderful weekend all,