Responding to an Income Protection Task Force White Paper, which stated that: ‘In many cases, adviser views have been formed by product marketers and ease of sale rather than fact and client find’, Phil Perry, director at ARK Financial Planning, said the statement was unjust.
He argued that while IP and MPPI could be mis-sold by brokers, the majority of advisers asked the appropriate questions and advised their clients on the most appropriate deals.
However, he admitted that consumers should be made more aware of the differences.
He said: “Even if brokers can advise on PPI it is important they are aware of the different benefits to IP so they can refer their clients to someone who can sell them a more suitable product. For example, if you are self-employed, IP can offer more effective cover.”
Perry argued that even if MPPI products were explained properly, advisers should make their customers aware that MPPI and accident, sickness and unemployment insurance often offered cover for a limited time scale only, while IP could provide more sustainable cover.
Paul Thompson, chief executive at D&D Homecare Limited, said: “If an adviser is doing the best job they can, they should explore all their clients’ needs and find the best product.
“It depends really what the client wants. You could say PPI, sold in conjunction with IP that can be deferred for 12 months is the most comprehensive cover.”
