Conflicted fees are once again a hot legal topic, with Suncorp being hit with a class action in the New South Wales Supreme Court over superannuation commissions paid to advisers.
Law firm, William Roberts Lawyers, and the litigation funder backing the action, Litigation Capital Management, today filed the action against Suncorp’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Suncorp Portfolio Service Limited, which was a trustee responsible for the administration of Suncorp Super Funds.
Suncorp planned to put up a fight against the charges, announcing on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) today that “the matter will be defended”.
The class action, initially announced in June, would allege that Suncorp Super executed agreements to entrench fees to be used for payment of conflicted remuneration that would otherwise have been banned from 1 July, 2013, under the Future of Financial Advice reforms.
In this, William Roberts Lawyers would allege that Suncorp Super breached its duties to avoid conflicts, act with due care and diligence, and act in its members’ best interests. The law firm specified that the company would be the subject of the proceedings however, saying it didn’t propose suing any of the financial advisers receiving the fees.
There is a need for Australia’s superannuation funds to simplify their investment menus, according to the firm, given over a third of funds have more than 30 options, of which one or more are “arguably subscale”.
The research house is set to offer research ratings of superannuation funds for the first time amid growing demand from financial advisers.
Treasury is calling for submissions on its draft regulations in relation to the calculation of the proposed Division 296 tax.
Initially intended to offer a “simple, cost-effective” option for Aussies invested in default fund options, a super consultant has weighed in on what the scheme has actually done for members.
Add new comment