LETTERS

Designation hitter

I was disturbed to read the March 2 letter by Barry L. Cox arguing against an

InvestmentNews editorial promoting the certified financial planner mark (“Are we on the CFP payroll?”).

Mr. Cox may be right in saying there is a trademark craze in the profession. He may also be right when he says anyone can get a “financial planner” designation or trademark and still be unethical, immoral and incompetent. These observations, however, argue strongly for the CFP designation.

The International Association for Financial Planning is recommending the attainment of the CFP designation for practitioners who hold themselves out as financial planners because it is important to reduce consumer confusion. By uniting the profession behind one widely recognized designation, perhaps we can put an end to the “designation craze.”

The issues of competency and ethics also argue for the attainment of the CFP designation. The public is becoming increasingly aware that anyone can call himself a “financial planner,” but not anyone can use the CFP designation. CFP designees must pass a rigorous competency exam, meet education and experience requirements, commit to a program of continuing education and agree to adhere to the CFP Board of Standards’ Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility.

While I am sure that there are many competent professionals out there who do not hold any designation, it is difficult for the public to know who they are. By uniting the industry around one standard, I believe we can elevate the profession to a higher level.

JOEL P. BRUCKENSTEIN

President

Global Financial Advisors Inc.

Pleasantville, N.Y.

…no, he’s right…

Mr. Cox is right on the money. I have been a member of the International Association for Financial Planning for many years and have recently terminated my membership over the CFP-only campaign.

WILLIAM E. McELVEEN

Registered representative

Mutual Service Corp.

McKenney, Va.

…no, he misses p
oint

Mr. Cox seems to have missed the point of the discussions about the desirability of having a designation serving the entire profession. It is clear and undisputed that many competent professionals do not have the CFP or other designation; the question is not whether they are competent, but how does the public know that?

As for incompetent CFPs, the facts are that each person so designated passed a difficult set of examinations and had a minimum of three years experience advising clients. All CFPs contribute annually to a fund that maintains standards and enforces rules. All CFPs study and are required to take courses to keep up with their profession.

It is a free country and Mr. Cox may choose not to support any designation. But considering the number of unqualified individuals holding themselves out as “financial planners,” it is time that the profession organize to insure quality control for the public.

Should Mr. Cox have evidence that a particular CFP designee is “unethical, immoral or incompetent,” the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards would like to hear about it. Where does a member of the public go if an unlicensed person proves to be such?

ROBERT LANKIN

Branch manager

Robert Thomas Securities Inc.

Glenside, Pa.