Royal Commission - Financial Services

[Number37]

So Morriscum replaces some (but not all) of the funding that his own government took away from ASIC. And expects everyone to stand and applaud him for replacing this funding (which they have been dragged kicking and screaming by Labor to actually have to do).

This mob honestly think we were born yesterday.

Paid for by an increased levy, which is paid by the consumer.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

So Morriscum replaces some (but not all) of the funding that his own government took away from ASIC. And expects everyone to stand and applaud him for replacing this funding (which they have been dragged kicking and screaming by Labor to actually have to do).

This mob honestly think we were born yesterday.

And people have said in this thread that ASIC hasn't been performing well anyway (i.e. even when they had the fuller funding), so the 'new measures' they're referring to better be some really powerful measures.

If only they could base these new measures on revelations gotten from a broad investigation into financial services which compelled people to give evidence so we could find out where the problems have really been coming from... Kinda like a Royal Commission, I guess. Then those measures could be well-targeted so we aren't wasting money long-term.

Turnbull insists the government’s new measures for Asic are “not a response to anything that has happened recently”.

“This is an issue we’ve been addressing methodically,” he said. “My focus has been on getting action here.”

 

[rodney hoo]

Paid for by an increased levy, which is paid by the consumer.

To use liberal terminology

A levy is a tax, a big fat new tax.

 

[Number37]

To use liberal terminology

A levy is a tax, a big fat new tax.

Another thing we are supposed to have forgotten.
Shhhhh

 

[sherb]

If the banks pass the cost of the $120 million onto the consumer, Scotty is going to get mad.

Like, rly, rly, rly mad. He said so. I heard him.

That'll show 'em, go Scotty you good thing..............

 

[Goldenblue]

If the banks pass the cost of the $120 million onto the consumer, Scotty is going to get mad.

Like, rly, rly, rly mad. He said so. I heard him.

That'll show 'em, go Scotty you good thing..............

Band aid solution and gutless policy. It is quite well known that the big 4 contribute a lot of money to the LNP at election time and they will not bite the hand that feeds it.

LNP crapping themselves because of Shorten's proposed RC in the banks if he wins office. This election is not about the union bashing that the LNP is using as a strategy to win the election, this time it's about banks and polls are proving it. The ALP have cleverly wedged the LNP on this matter. They have to be seeing doing something to the public, but are worried about hurting their friends in the banking and financial systems. This is a gutless solution and we are not that stupid to see through it. Shorten is doing well and the LNP are running scared. Bad policy by the LNP.

 

[RUNVS]

Band aid solution and gutless policy. It is quite well known that the big 4 contribute a lot of money to the LNP at election time and they will not bite the hand that feeds it.

LNP crapping themselves because of Shorten's proposed RC in the banks if he wins office. This election is not about the union bashing that the LNP is using as a strategy to win the election, this time it's about banks and polls are proving it. The ALP have cleverly wedged the LNP on this matter. They have to be seeing doing something to the public, but are worried about hurting their friends in the banking and financial systems. This is a gutless solution and we are not that stupid to see through it. Shorten is doing well and the LNP are running scared. Bad policy by the LNP.

Labor have really trapped the Liberals here as every time the Liberals bring up the Royal Commission into Unions then Labor can just bring up the Financial Services and why the Unions deserve a Royal Commission looking into them but the banks do not. There is no way the Liberal Party can win that debate as Unions are way more popular than the banking industry and everyone at some point has been screwed over by a bank.

 

[Pie eyed]

Calling all unions murderous, criminal organisations could be construed as being a tad emotional I'd suggest.

Just a tad, in fact per capits, Union members are no more or less corrupt than Business owners, Bankers, Lawyers or the entire Liberal party.
The bulk or Royal Commissions established by the Libs since Tony the Reptile stumbled into power have been done so for vindictive political reasons.
The Liberal Party's finding scams are no less Royal Commission worthy than that called to look into the Unions.
The difference is they are in power.
I think the low campaigner Abbott set the bar lower than a snakes Abbott.
The disgusting man has done so much to tarnish the the office of both Prime Minister and Opposition Leader he should leave the country and return home to his homeland in England. Let them deal with the dog.

 

[flashmanvc]

Gotta confess I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to matters financial. It's like a mind block. I start reading a piece in the business section of the paper, I can feel my eyes cloud over and, before you know it, I'm off with the pixies, thinking instead about taking my Golden Retriever down the river for a swim or something.

I have a mortgage, which I duly ignore to the best of my ability.

The thing is two days back my bank called asking if I'd like to catch up for a cup of tea and a chat. Said they could offer me a fixed interest rate or some such. Can't offer specifics on what she was offering because as soon as I realised she wanted to discuss money I made an excuse and hung up because my heart had started pulsating like a sick dogs a-hole.

In a perfect world I could go down to the bank, confess my ignorance and ask her to make the decision that is in my best interest. But she would, in fact, make the decision that benefited her, or her employer, over my own self. That's messed up and that's what needs to change.

 

[Number37]

Gotta confess I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to matters financial. It's like a mind block. I start reading a piece in the business section of the paper, I can feel my eyes cloud over and, before you know it, I'm off with the pixies, thinking instead about taking my Golden Retriever down the river for a swim or something.

I have a mortgage, which I duly ignore to the best of my ability.

The thing is two days back my bank called asking if I'd like to catch up for a cup of tea and a chat. Said they could offer me a fixed interest rate or some such. Can't offer specifics on what she was offering because as soon as I realised she wanted to discuss money I made an excuse and hung up because my heart had started pulsating like a sick dogs a-hole.

In a perfect world I could go down to the bank, confess my ignorance and ask her to make the decision that is in my best interest. But she would, in fact, make the decision that benefited her, or her employer, over my own self. That's messed up and that's what needs to change.

She would get you to sign a PDS in order to cover her arse, that is also why we need a RC.
The LNP option will see that banks spend more of your time and money on making sure you can't hold them to account should something go wrong.

 

[sherb]

As a minor example of what grubby, unethical organizations banks are, I got slugged a $10 overlimit fee by the Commonwealth Bank for going $14.58 over my Mastercard credit limit for one day.

 

[Lebbo73]

As a minor example of what grubby, unethical organizations banks are, I got slugged a $10 overlimit fee by the Commonwealth Bank for going $14.58 over my Mastercard credit limit for one day.

All self inflicted!

 

[sherb]

All self inflicted!

You miss the point. By a substantial margin.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

As a minor example of what grubby, unethical organizations banks are, I got slugged a $10 overlimit fee by the Commonwealth Bank for going $14.58 over my Mastercard credit limit for one day.

Luxury! In my day I was charged $50 and the overdraw was on a debit card. i.e. Their fault.

I quit the bank and went with a credit union. Now I pay a few chunks of change for one-off fees but don't have monthly fees. There's been little downside.

 

[Lebbo73]

You miss the point. By a substantial margin.

I am with Heritage. Change banks ffs. Don't let the Big 4 shaft you. It is a simple choice. We have the power to make them competitive!

 

[sherb]

I am with Heritage. Change banks ffs. Don't let the Big 4 shaft you. It is a simple choice. We have the power to make them competitive!

I didn't say I didn't take, or wouldn't be taking, action.

As I said, you missed the point I was making. It wasn't about me. It was about how banks think they can treat their customers.

 

[JoseMourinho]

In a perfect world I could go down to the bank, confess my ignorance and ask her to make the decision that is in my best interest. But she would, in fact, make the decision that benefited her, or her employer, over my own self. That's messed up and that's what needs to change.

FOFA has already covered this. If you give financial advice, you have to act in the best interests of the client otherwise you're stuffed. I'm not sure if applies to lenders but if a Financial Adviser/Mortgage Broker recommends a product, it has to be in your best interest otherwise when ASIC takes a look at it after your complaint, they'll get stuffed and will be forced to pay up.

Unfortunately, if you can't do research on the many sites that give you interest rates and costs then you're going to need a good person to organise your finances or do it yourself.

I'm sorry for being this blunt to you but it isn't all sunshine and rainbows out there. There are product floggers (especially with loans) that are purely employed to flog products but there are some good planners out there (despite what you see on here).

If you need some education help on money, feel free to go over to the money board for some information.

Paid for by an increased levy, which is paid by the consumer.

If the banks pass the cost of the $120 million onto the consumer, Scotty is going to get mad.

You guys act like it is completely scandalous that when a government passes a regulation/levy on an industry that the affected industry passes the cost onto you. It isn't anything new and most definitely is not unique to the banking industry of any stretch (but you will claim it is )

She would get you to sign a PDS in order to cover her arse, that is also why we need a RC.

Shows how much you know, you don't need to provide a PDS for a simple loan product such as a mortgage. They do provide the terms and conditions and the loan documents.

I didn't say I didn't take, or wouldn't be taking, action.

As I said, you missed the point I was making. It wasn't about me. It was about how banks think they can treat their customers.

If a company keeps treating you like a statistic and not a human being then leave.

Well...
You're obviously unbiased and altruistic!

No hyperbole in your post at all!

Given reading the RC into Union thread, it is basically role reversal. Telsor is bang on about satirising this situation.

He only misses one difference that there is not a huge regulatory authority like ASIC, APRA and FOS under it.

 

[JoseMourinho]

Financial Services, specifically financial planning and brokering needs an overhaul but getting rid of s708 will achieve that overnight and education over a generation.

Why do you want to get rid of the Retail/Professional Investor distinction, I don't even understand what that'd bring. One of the main reason anybody even goes to a Financial Planner is because a) it is not their expertise or b) they don't have the time.

Those two key indicators require the financial planner to provide them the information to them.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/s708.html

 

[Number37]

You guys act like it is completely scandalous that when a government passes a regulation/levy on an industry that the affected industry passes the cost onto you. It isn't anything new and most definitely is not unique to the banking industry of any stretch (but you will claim it is )

We are not complaining about the end user paying.
We are complaining about the fact that the LNP wants us to swallow their BS that the banks are the ones ponying up to fund ASIC properly.

 

[Power Raid]

Why do you want to get rid of the Retail/Professional Investor distinction, I don't even understand what that'd bring. One of the main reason anybody even goes to a Financial Planner is because a) it is not their expertise or b) they don't have the time.

Those two key indicators require the financial planner to provide them the information to them.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/s708.html

s708 is a massive issue

if you have a good financial product; do you:
a) make three or for phone calls and raise $100m; or
b) spend months preparing a disclosure document, spends tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands on experts, writing a document that no one reads or understands, only to open yourself up to law suits anyway. Then pay 5-10% to people to convince mums and dads they are being offered a good product.


in short s708 creates a market for lemons, where good product does not go to retail clients (mums and dads) which are then pushed by middlemen creaming of the top after lawyers have already raped and pillaged.

 

[JoseMourinho]

s708 is a massive issue

if you have a good financial product; do you:
a) make three or for phone calls and raise $100m; or
b) spend months preparing a disclosure document, spends tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands on experts, writing a document that no one reads or understands, only to open yourself up to law suits anyway. Then pay 5-10% to people to convince mums and dads they are being offered a good product.


in short s708 creates a market for lemons, where good product does not go to retail clients (mums and dads) which are then pushed by middlemen creaming of the top after lawyers have already raped and pillaged.

You're talking from a fund manager's perspective, as a financial planner, you should already have the research .

Good financial products usually get picked off by the institutions (your option a) essentially and any of the s**t ones get pushed onto financial planners/retail clients as you said. I guess I can understand where you are coming from. And pfft, you never pay financial planners above 1.5% and you know that.

But eh, we managed to snare some Healthscope for our clients at $2.10 and it has performed well! I think you might be a bit cynical because from my recent experience with IPOs specifically on shares that the retail investors usually don't get screwed out on it.

 

[JoseMourinho]

We are not complaining about the end user paying.
We are complaining about the fact that the LNP wants us to swallow their BS that the banks are the ones ponying up to fund ASIC properly.

So I take it you weren't swallowing up the crap when Labor said the big polluters would pay the carbon tax then? Well I hope you weren't!

 

[Power Raid]

Why do you want to get rid of the Retail/Professional Investor distinction, I don't even understand what that'd bring. One of the main reason anybody even goes to a Financial Planner is because a) it is not their expertise or b) they don't have the time.

Those two key indicators require the financial planner to provide them the information to them.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/s708.html

Not a 708 issue directly but financial planners are creaming 130% commissions on insurance.

So if insurance cost $1,000 the insurance companies are paying $1,300 commission.

Wow.....I wonder who ultimately pays for that?

 

[JoseMourinho]

Not a 708 issue directly but financial planners are creaming 130% commissions on insurance.

So if insurance cost $1,000 the insurance companies are paying $1,300 commission.

Wow.....I wonder who ultimately pays for that?

Exactly, i'm all for getting rid of Upfront commission but I think the max you can get now on an upfront is 110% but that'll be forced changed to a hybrid.

The funny thing is that if you get rid of the adviser's commission, the insurance company won't drop premiums and they get all of it instead! It has already happened with Group Insurance.

 

[Power Raid]

You're talking from a fund manager's perspective, as a financial planner, you should already have the research .

Good financial products usually get picked off by the institutions (your option a) essentially and any of the s**t ones get pushed onto financial planners/retail clients as you said. I guess I can understand where you are coming from. And pfft, you never pay financial planners above 1.5% and you know that.

But eh, we managed to snare some Healthscope for our clients at $2.10 and it has performed well! I think you might be a bit cynical because from my recent experience with IPOs specifically on shares that the retail investors usually don't get screwed out on it.

I'm not having a dig at financial planners.

I'm having a dig at legislation that stops mums and dad being offered good products.

Sure there are examples where mum's and dads make good investments but I can guarantee instos get far better product because of s708