6th December 2012

Can somebody put this in Plain English

A “Brown noser" is defined as an employee who tries desperately (and unsuccessfully) to impress the boss and be promoted.

 

With this in mind, we hear that the FSA has set out how adviser business models will be tested.

They are quoted as saying the guidance is not specific or exhaustive. then add: “Although a specific business model threshold does not currently exist, when assessing a firm against the threshold conditions as a whole, the FSA does ask for information about a firm’s business model.

“Therefore the revised threshold conditions, which now include a specific business model threshold condition, make explicit what is already implicit and as a result we believe our new business model guidance reflects existing practice.”

Who wrote this, why and someone, anyone, please explain what this means.

I think that this statement must qualify as one of the very worst examples of regulatory “W Cubed” speak- the unrealistic claim that your company can deliver whatever, wherever, whenever it's needed to the regulator.

This is such a bad example we are offering a prize, not too big, for the best translation to plain ENGLISH. 

Panacea Comment

Registration

Free Registration and CPD

Read More

Related Articles_

The Golden Rule of AI for Financial Advisers: Protect Your Client Data

Artificial intelligence has the potential to transform the way advice firms work, helping to reduce administration, improve efficiency and free up more time for clients. But before embracing AI, there is one principle that should never be overlooked

Read More

Getting Better Results from AI: The RTCC Framework

Artificial intelligence is only as good as the instructions you give it. If you’ve ever asked AI a question and received an answer that felt generic, vague or simply not quite right, don’t be too quick to blame the technology.

Read More

Beyond the Hype: The Four Pillars of AI Assistance for Financial Advisers

Artificial intelligence has quickly become one of the biggest talking points in financial services. But once you look beyond the headlines, many advisers are left asking the same question: “What would I actually use it for?” If your only experience of AI has been asking it to write the occasional email, you’re only scratching the surface.

Read More

Comments (5)

I think you have missed the point.

The Canaries may well know something about the nit picking intricacies of bureaucratic regulation, but since when did they know anything about running a business?

They might be staffed by a load of accountants who are not good enough to have set up and run their own practices so it is evident they are not even remotely qualified to tell some of us who have been running our own successful businesses while they were still in nappies, whether or not we are sustainable.

Harry Katz   10/12/2012   09:13
Actually I think the definition of the term used is somewhat different. I remember a sports commentator getting into trouble a few years ago for using the term.
Just wanted to let you know before someone complains, even though it is an honest mistake.

Patrick Schan   10/12/2012   09:59
Its very simple, if you get it right we will fine you if you get it wrong we will fine you more. PS you will never be right so we will fine you, lots.

Phillip Masters   10/12/2012   10:21
No, it cannot be done. It is deliberately obfuscatory. Such drivel, or perhaps Newspeak, is specifically designed to allow the Failed FSA to interpret as it sees fit, that is capriciously. It is a trap.

Steven Farrall   10/12/2012   11:17
Thanks Patrick, changed accordingly.

Derek Bradley   10/12/2012   11:19

You need to be logged in to comment on this article