Other Voices

CFP Board sanction rationale unfair?

May 25, 2014 @ 12:01 am

Ray Ferrara, chairman of the CFP Board, elicited a flurry of reader responses with his Op-Ed in last week's issue on the CFP Board's enforcement of its “fee only” definition. Some readers expressed dissatisfaction over the CFP Board's handling of the Camarda lawsuit, along with its approach to adviser discipline —particularly its decision not to sanction others who violated the rules.

It was an absolute disgrace, an abysmal act and a disservice to the public when they chose to allow all the people who violated the rules to escape sanction. If violating the rule was enough to prosecute the Camardas, it is certainly enough to prosecute everyone else. Ferrara "s response seems to demonstrate poor judgment at best.” - PPott

While the CFP Board yearns to become a meaningful thought leader and SRO, its various missteps over the years continue to reflect its inability to impact the advice profession in the proper manner.” - The Blogger

The CFP Board should be commended for standing up for the fee-only fiduciary standard. I do think that they avoided nailing all those who lied on their profiles so as not to embarrass the wirehouses, which are paying a lot of fees to the board via their member CFPs.” -Mister RIA

The CFP Board of Standards lacks integrity in objectively evaluating cases for discipline. The "peers' reviewing written hearings were all wirehouse brokers. I went from a nine-year advocate without a single blemish to recognizing the real CFP agenda, and a disregard for my life's work.” - Rackman11

I had a CFP who reported to me go through a similar situation 12 years ago. As they say in Texas, "all hat and no cattle.' THE CFP designation continues to be questioned, and rightfully so!” —NoLonger7Registered


What do you think?


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print