Shirley Owen

Advice Quality Manager, Simplybiz

Protection advice remains a fundamental part of financial planning, yet file review outcomes are consistently mixed. While many advisers demonstrate strong technical knowledge and a genuine focus on client outcomes, there are still recurring gaps in how protection needs are identified, evidenced, and implemented.

Observations

Typical issues include weak or incomplete factfinding, unclear rationale for recommendations, and inconsistent alignment between client needs and product selection. In some cases, insufficient challenge around affordability can result in clients shaping cover to fit a perceived budget, rather than fully understanding what level of protection is appropriate to meet their needs. This can limit the suitability of outcomes and increase the risk of causing foreseeable harm, particularly where clients are not provided with clear explanations of the value and impact of adequate protection.

There are, however, clear examples of good practice.

Strong cases demonstrate thorough factfinding, well-evidenced affordability discussions, and carefully matched product solutions. Advisers who take time to explain need, clearly articulate the benefits of protection, and provide appropriate challenge where required are better able to support informed client decisions. Tools such as protection menus and reallife scenarios can further enhance understanding and engagement.

The opportunity for the profession is clear: by strengthening the fundamentals, protection advice can deliver more consistent, meaningful value and better protect clients and their families.

Common themes identified in file reviews

Areas for improvement:

• Incomplete or weak factfinding. Example: Limited detail on outgoings or dependants, resulting in a recommendation that doesn’ t reflect actual financial commitments.

10 | Protection Adviser Online