Small licensees are PI insurance compliant: ASICBY KARREN VERGARA | WEDNESDAY, 30 AUG 2017 12:26PMThe majority of small Australian financial services licensees are meeting professional indemnity (PI) insurance obligations, according to an ASIC investigation.
Related News |
Editor's Choice
T. Rowe Price appoints local operations chief
T. Rowe Price, the global asset manager with over US$1.3 trillion in assets under management, has appointed a regional operating chief who will relocate to Sydney from the London office.
Vanguard backs current performance test
Vanguard has endorsed the current performance test methodology in a submission to Treasury, championing its effectiveness in eliminating underperforming investment options and improving member outcomes.
Sequoia chair steps down
The chair of Sequoia Financial Group, John Larsen, has resigned from the position and his replacement has been appointed.
Court approves $16m DASS settlement
The Federal Court has approved the settlement reached in the $16 million class action brought against Dixon Advisory & Superannuation Services (DASS) following a two-week delay.
Further Reading
Sponsored by | Where do advisers invest their time?The stage 3 tax cuts have sparked discussions on bracket creep. Implementing a tax-effective investment strategy is crucial now more than ever. |
Sponsored by | Quality and Yield. A Powerful combination.With central bank rates seemingly peaked, investors are not awaiting yield increases. We're bucking the trend with investment rates at decadal highs |
Sponsored by | Why it could be a good time to be a growth contrarianGrowth-style companies are in vogue, but you may need to think outside the box to ensure you don't overpay. |
Products
Featured Profile
Fiona Mann
HEAD OF LISTED EQUITIES AND ESG
BRIGHTER SUPER
BRIGHTER SUPER
Brighter Super head of listed equities and ESG Fiona Mann was shaped by a childhood steeped in military-like discipline and global nomadism. Andrew McKean writes.
The statement that the majority of small licensees are meeting their PI obligation is farcical given that the vast majority when requesting cover ask for "the lowest premium possible". When asked what do they want the answer in the majority of cases is "the cheapest".
It is even becoming very regular that the licensees are asking for quotations on larger and larger excesses so as to reduce the premiums. This does not ensure protection for the consumer.
Recently excesses of $500,000 any one claim was requested by a company with $1 million turnover. What is the regulated formula for complying cover please.