Can the CFP Board Survive this Crisis?

Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.

Trust and confidence in financial advice were news last week. The Wall Street Journal reported that the CFP Board’s website excluded a lot of negative information about CFPs. The Journal compared 72,000 CPF profiles against what the planners reported to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). The Journal’s headline: “The Go-to Web site often Omits Red Flags.”

The Journal’s story shook confidence in the CFP Board’s certification process. It’s a major crisis. One veteran planner compared it to the 1982 Tylenol fiasco. It threatens the CFP mark and demands an effective crisis management response.

It also offers an opportunity.

Trust in finance is in short supply. Tiburon Strategic Advisors’ report last October said that three-quarters of consumers believe, “Madoff-type behavior is common among financial advisors and financial institutions.”

The Journal’s report found consumers won’t find on the CFP Board web site, “Any indication that thousands of the planners bearing the Board’s seal of approval have had customer complaints or faced criminal or regulatory problems – often directly related to their work with clients.”

Specifically, “More than 5,000 have faced formal complaints from their clients over investment recommendations of sales practices, and hundreds have been disciplined by financial regulators or left brokerage firms amid allegations of misconduct. At least 140 faced or currently face felony charges.”

The CFP Board replied, “In some cases the Wall Street Journal raises important issues, which we are addressing.” The Board, “relies heavily on self-disclosure, complaints from either clients or other CFPs and news scans … it will from now on look at FINRA and SEC records each time a CFP renews certification.”