Set the boundaries

19 Aug 2013Feature

Financial advisers must understand their role in wealth management as well as that of the discretionary fund manager and client, says Claire Bennison

The Retail Distribution Review (RDR) brought in a number of changes to the wealth management industry. It also clarified the roles between the financial adviser (adviser), the discretionary fund manager (DFM) and the client. Suitability, and who takes responsibility for what part of the advice and investment management for the client, continues to be a dominant theme within the industry and was specifically brought to light by the then Financial Services Authority’s (FSA) ‘Dear CEO’ letter in 2011.

The financial regulator isn’t concerned about which party is responsible for suitability, rather that responsibility is explicitly taken for suitability and it is conducted thoroughly. So who takes what role in client relationship to assist them in reaching their investment objectives?

The then Financial Services Authority’s 2011 review of wealth management firms highlighted that for suitability to be demonstrated sufficiently, the adviser and/or DFM must gather a wide range of ‘know your client’ information, including a client’s financial situation. Of equal importance is ensuring that the portfolio is suitably constructed using this information, i.e. a creating a portfolio that accurately reflects the client’s attitude to risk and investment mandate.

Advisers and DFMs can work together to ensure that the DFM investment process at a micro-level is consistent with the adviser’s holistic approach. This should mean that both adviser and DFM can fulfil their obligations to the client while being comfortable that each party’s specialised skills are being used efficiently.

In our view, when an adviser takes on the responsibility of suitability, the client understands that the adviser:

determines the knowledge and experience of the client to assess whether the client understands the risks involved in having an investment portfolio; and
obtains information about the client’s financial situation to determine whether they can bear any potential financial loss related to their given risk profile and proposed portfolio.

In this instance, the DFM’s responsibility for suitability consists of creating and managing an investment portfolio in line with the risk profile and investment objectives established by the adviser and the client. It is important, therefore, that the adviser has a strong knowledge of risk-mapping to ensure that their recommendation, for example a medium-risk mandate, matches the needs of the client given the DFM’s definition of medium risk.

This task is arguably made harder for the adviser as each DFM has a different definition of risk, and the risk profiles and asset allocations produced from this are likely to vary.

How does a DFM meet their requirements of suitability for the client? By ensuring that each investment vehicle and holding used to construct the portfolio meets the investment objective and risk profile of the client when viewed in aggregate.

Looking at these aspects is only the beginning. It is by combining different asset classes, reviewing their volatility and other characteristics, and examining the portfolio as a whole that you can ensure the portfolio meets the risk profile’s definition. The DFM’s role is to ensure the portfolio fits the investment objectives with an acceptable amount of volatility, and that this continues.

The DFM must demonstrate that appropriate controls and procedures are in place to consistently monitor portfolio analytics. To be comfortable that the appropriate level of due diligence has been completed and to ensure that suitability has been met, we completed more than 20,000 hours of research last year, undertaking challenging phases of analysis before any investment is considered for a portfolio.

Clearly defining the adviser’s extensive role – together with the management of the investment portfolio provided by a DFM – should create a much stronger foundation for the client, who is benefiting from extensive knowledge, experience and time to complete all aspects of their wealth management.

Claire Bennison is regional director at Brooks Macdonald in Manchester

She writes a regular in-practice article on asset management for Private Client Adviser

This article was published in the September 2013 issue

Legal News desk contact: editorial@solicitorsjournal.com

When pets become a family law issue

As pet ownership rises, family law struggles to reconcile animals’ sentience with their continued treatment as property

Shipping cartel settlement approved for consumers

The Competition Appeal Tribunal has finalised a £92.75 million settlement for affected vehicle purchasers

Consultation launched for housing offences

The Sentencing Council is inviting public input on new sentencing guidelines for housing offences

Abraaj Investment Management v Kes Power: Commercial estoppel and the assignment of receivables

High Court validates security assignment despite technical flaws through estoppel by convention principles.

Director of Public Prosecutions v Boureanu: Confiscation orders and the meaning of conviction

Romanian confiscation order enforced despite limitation preventing custodial sentence following corruption conviction.

Odusanya v Pennine Care Foundation Trust: witness evidence discussions and the right to representation

Strike-out appeal partially allowed where claimant denied consultation with representative during proceedings.

Smithstone v Tranmoor Primary School: Court of Appeal clarifies Part 36 costs in settled claims

90:10 liability offers viable but require actual determination to trigger enhanced costs

Network Rail Infrastructure Limited v Karl List: Advertising rights and railway hereditaments

Court of Appeal clarifies rating liability for advertising sites within operational railway stations under business rates legislation.

Cubic Transportation Systems v Transport for London: High Court lifts automatic suspension in £800m procurement challenge

TfL revenue collection contract dispute demonstrates adequacy of damages in major infrastructure procurement challenges.

Ioan Mailat v Hunedoara City Court: European arrest warrant particularisation requirements

High Court clarifies when missing offence details constitute wholesale failure in conviction warrants

High Court allows trial against Dyson

A High Court ruling sets the stage for a trial next year regarding claims against Dyson companies

Home Secretary gains power to dismiss chief constables

Under the new laws, Home Secretaries will gain statutory authority to force the retirement, resignation, or suspension of chief constables based on their performance

Hogan Lovells reveals bribery outlook 2026

Global law firm Hogan Lovells has launched its Bribery, Investigations & Enforcement Outlook report for 2026 focusing on emerging trends in compliance for multinational organizations

Limbu v Dyson: High Court orders liability trial for migrant workers' exploitation claims

Split trial approved over preliminary issues in Malaysian factory conditions case

Phullar v Ofsted: Employment tribunal failures in disability discrimination and unfair dismissal appeal

Dismissal for capability during cancer recovery raised procedural and reasonable adjustment failures throughout.

SJ Interview: Joelle Grogan

Dr Joelle Grogan is a legal scholar specialising in the rule of law in times of crisis. She presents The Law Show on BBC Radio 4, and is Co-Academic Director of the Rule of Law Clinic at the CEU Democracy Institute (Budapest), and a Senior Research Fellow at the UCD Sutherland School of Law. Her work focuses on constitutional accountability, emergency powers, and legal misinformation. In this interview, she examines the pressures facing the rule of law in the UK, from executive power and court delays to media narratives, emergencies, and the impact of AI on legal practice.

Justice reform risks targeting the wrong fix

As 2026 approaches, ministers eye jury trials while ignoring deeper causes of England’s criminal justice crisis