“In our view, the legislative decision to rely on credentialing bodies to monitor and adjudicate the market conduct of the individuals they accredit, rather than rely on an existing financial regulatory body, creates a weaker standard of accountability, and risks achieving the goal of strengthened consumer confidence,” IFB said in a comment letter dated June 21, 2021.
“The success of this new framework will lie heavily in FSRA’s ability to provide robust oversight of the accredited credentialing bodies, including consistent standards, to ensure consumers are, indeed, well-served, regardless of which CB has accredited their FP or FA,” IFB said.
In a recent statement, FSRA asserted that its approved credentialing bodies meet all minimum requirements, which include providing a minimum standard of education, having a code of conduct to put clients’ interests first, and having a complaints and disciplinary process in place for errant credential holders.
Read more: FSRA stands by title protection framework
“[W]here they have unproven processes necessary to meet these standards, [CBs] will be subject to ongoing focused review,” said Huston Loke, FSRA executive vice president, Market Conduct, who also offered assurance that the regulator has a process in place to review “all aspects of the performance of credentialing bodies.”
