Suggested Posts

Risk challenged adviser-less Fees

The second line risk team pushed back against the idea that NAB could keep the money based on the fact that it provided some other services of value.

It is alleged that NAB attempted to find a legitimate reason to hold onto member fee in cases where advice was not provided by suggesting that there were other services.

“What you did was systematically look for way not to refund all of your customers, and that is why there is some idea that somehow you will find some other service that can be said to have been provided in exchange for the money,” Michal Hodge QC charged the Paul Carter NULIS (MLC/NAB). He suggested that this would allow them to maintain the PSFs.

Carter said challenged this by suggesting that they were thoroughly investigating the matter and that there were some differing views on the issue.

Hodge also challenged the ‘ambiguity’ around those fees that were meant to be negotiated between employer and adviser where there was no adviser attached.

No tags yet.

©2018-2019 by The GRC Institute - Governance, Risk & Compliance.  ABN: 42862119377