Don’t want full access? REGISTER NOW for limited access and to subscribe to our newsletters.

The chief executive of Seccl has claimed that “crap technology” has compromised the adviser-client digital experience.

David Ferguson said most of the technology in the advice sector “is quite old” and not “built for connectivity”.

He said: “We now talk about API, but if you look at the end-to-end thing, the adviser client digital experience has been compromised by crap technology and their business efficiency has been constrained by that as well.”

Ferguson made his comments at Money Marketing Interactive in London yesterday (8 October).

He was speaking as part of an industry panel for advisers on how they can choose the right systems and tech stack for their business.

He noted that though technology has grown in leaps and bounds over the last 20 years, the advice sector technology still lags in several areas, including integration.

Ferguson said the issue is affecting adviser businesses.

“One thing that troubles me is a lot of the cost in adviser businesses is [because] they are dealing with providers that can’t do the job properly.                                                                                                                                                                      “And that’s technology not speaking to each other even in the inside of these provider companies. The idea that they’re going to magically speak together outside with other systems – that’s just completely nuts,” Ferguson said.

Speaking on the same panel as Ferguson, Timeline founder and CEO Abraham Okunsanya, dispelled the myth about a ‘best of breed’ technology stack.

He said: “This idea of best of breed versus all in one doesn’t exist.

“There aren’t many technology stacks in the market today that will do everything you want and equally the idea that you bring together all these various tools, and you will get the same level of efficiency or effectiveness as you do with an all-in-one [system] is just not true.

“Ultimately you have to figure out what you want to achieve with your business and try to find the technology solution that does that.

“I would argue that the direction of travel is that we’re moving towards more joined up technology, more integrated ecosystem than multiple tools that just don’t talk to each other.”

Zerokey co-founder and CEO, Joseph Williams, said that advisers should have the choice of the technology solutions they want to adopt.

“They shouldn’t be faced with the compromise of choosing best of breed [and] the inefficiencies that it brings.

“If they wish to use an all-in-one solution and that’s what they believe is best for them and their clients, then that’s the route they should go down,” Williams said.

He said that whatever route advisers chose, their tech stacks should “talk to one another”.

“There are ways that we can solve this solution other than the traditional approach to integration that we’ve always forged and clearly it hasn’t worked,” he added.

Williams cited the Lang Cat report, published five years ago, that showed 85% of advisers blamed lack of integration for major cause of inefficiency.

The figure has risen to 94% in Intelliflo’s latest adviser efficiency survey.

On addressing the integration question, Okunsaya said he believes the sector needs to address the trust issue between institutions and regulated entities.

“Unless we can remove the lack of trust between regulated entities, we’re always going to find ourselves in this position,” he said.

“This is why I gave up hope on this idea of multiple third-party integration being the primary way that we drive efficiencies within financial planning firms.

“I strongly believe that the solution is you have an integrated ecosystem being probably 70, maybe 80% of what you want as a firm and then you plug one or two other things on top of that.”

Benchmark Capital CEO, Ed Dymott, said the problem is due to too many players in the advice space trying to outcompete each other.”

He said: “When I look at the adviser ecosystem, there are too many people trying to be in the same space. I think that’s not a trust thing. I think that’s everyone trying to compete in the same area. I think that’s a big challenge.

Dymott blamed regulation, particularly the Consumer Duty, for not addressing this issue.

“The Consumer Duty should have mandated better service levels and better access to providers,” he said.

BANKS including Nationwide and RBS are now charging a new £100 fee amid a major rule change.

New rules, which came in earlier this week, mean banks must now reimburse authorised push payment (APP) fraud victims.

1

A reimbursement limit of £85,000 has been applied under the rules, although banks can choose to go further than this and repay higher amounts.

But banks now have the power to impose a £100 excess fee when settling claims, a policy that five banks have now adopted.

So, if your claim is for a payment of £100 or less, trying to recover the money may not be of any benefit.

Excess fees will not apply to vulnerable consumers due to guidelines by the Payment Systems Regulator.

THE FIVE BANKS CHARGING THE FEE

The five banks implementing this fee are HSBC, First Direct, Lloyds, Halifax and Bank of Scotland.

A HSBC spokesperson told The Sun: “All of us have a role to play in preventing fraud and scams – we want to encourage customer caution, particularly when it comes to lower value purchases made online.”

The Sun reached out to the other banks mentioned above for comment, and we will update readers if we get any further responses.

Liz Edwards, a money expert at Finder previously told The Sun: “£100 is a lot of money to many people.

“Based on 2023 fraud figures, more than 58,000 cases would have resulted in no refund if all companies had applied the excess, and now only four of the major providers have confirmed they won’t.”

THE BANKS WHICH ‘MIGHT’ CHARGE THE FEE

Others have said they ‘may’ apply an excess or judge each case independently.

For example, Starling Bank has said it may apply an excess of £50 rather than £100.

A Natwest spokesperson also confirmed that they would assess claimants on a case-by-case basis and with regard to the specific circumstances of each customer.

The only way to avoid this caveat is to switch to one of the four banks which have pledged not to apply these charges.

THE BANKS NOT CHARGING THE FEE

Meanwhile, Nationwide, Virgin Money, TSB and AIB have said they will not implement the excess fee.

A Virgin Media spokesperson said: “Where customer circumstances result in a reimbursement under the rules, we are not planning to apply the voluntary excess, and this includes claims under £100.”

While a TSB said that the bank is “prioritising fraud protection for customers”.

They said: “Charging £100 could exclude a third of all victims from claiming refunds – and it’s not right to penalise people for scams that take place largely due to weaknesses on social media platforms.”

Last year there were 232,429 cases of APP fraud in the UK – a 12% jump since the year before.

Overall, £459.70 million was lost in 2023 to this type of scam.

Two-thirds of the total APP cases in 2023 were also down to purchase scams – which is when someone pays for goods or services which are never received.

This usually happens when purchasing off social media, as more than three-quarters of authorised fraud starts online.

Banks such as TSB emphasise that these scams are not the fault of the customer, while HSBC claims that by implementing the excess it will encourage shoppers to exercise more caution.

Shoppers should now be extra wary of dodgy deals when browsing online.

HOW CAN I PROTECT MYSELF FROM SCAMMERS?

When shopping online, always be cautious about where you’re buying from and what you’re buying.

If a price looks too good to be true, sometimes it actually is.

It’s much safer to stick to reputable websites where you know people in the UK usually shop from.

If you’re not sure about a website, it’s worth googling customer reviews and asking friends for their experiences.

Fraud cases which begin through phone conversations or emails are typically less common, but can lead to scammers getting hold of larger amounts of your cash.

Always check the source of the phone call by googling the number, or making sure the email is from an official domain.

Scammers can pose as banks and other trusted sources to get the information from you which they need to enter your bank account.

Always be sceptical not to provide any personal details over the phone – do not give away your PIN or full password as your bank will not need this and you are likely being scammed.

If you’re unsure, end the call and ring the trusted number of the organisation so that you definitely know you’re talking to the right people.

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@news.co.uk.

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories

A CELEBRITY chef’s seafront restaurant is set to close today after three years of business.

Michael Caines has shocked fans after announcing he is selling not just one but two of his popular restaurants.

2

2

Advertisement

Mickeys Beach Bar and Restaurant in Exmouth opened in April 2021 but tonight after dinner, it will close for good.

It offered all-day coffee, drinks, afternoon tea, and casual dining with glorious views of Torquay to Berry Head and the English Channel.

The restaurant was one of the first businesses in Sideshore and loved by many.

Customers on Google Reviews described it as having “a lovely atmosphere”, with “great views”, “seamless” service and “delicious” food.

Now, after three and a half years, it has been sold to someone else.

And not only this, Cafe Patisserie Glacerie, owned by Michael Caines and Sylvian Peltier will close too.

It is believed both restaurants have been sold to another local business, DevonLive reports.

Both venues will close in preparation for the site being sold.

In a statement Michael said: “On behalf of all the team we would like to thank our customers and suppliers for your support, we have thoroughly enjoyed serving each and every one of you and making Mickeys and the Café a special place to meet by the sea.

“I would also like to thank my team for their unwavering support and dedication, despite the challenging times we have had, I am proud of what we have been able to create.

“We are however delighted to announce the sale of the business to another local business operator who shares a similar passion, for fun relaxed dining.”

The Michael Caines Collection of restaurants said it will make another announcement once the sale is completed.

Customers have been redirected to Pool House Restaurant at Lympstone Manor hotel “for casual and relaxed dining”.

Disappointed locals took to Facebook to share their disappointment.

One person said: “Shame. Only decent place on the beach front.”

While a second wrote:  “Good job we grabbed a drink when we did.”

A third person said: “A sad reflection of Exmouth, falling further into poverty.”

And a fourth commented: “Well! We didn’t see that coming!…”

The Labour government “seems to be doing its best to scare people” into making bad decisions, according to Strategic Wealth Partners managing director and chartered financial planner Amyr Rocha Lima.

Speaking at Money Marketing Interactive in London yesterday (8 October), he told advisers to expect more phone calls ahead of the Budget.

“Even our most well behaved and responsible clients will reach out to us,” Lima said.

However, “if your clients do not reach out to you in the run-up to the Budget, you should reach out to them,” he added.

Triple Point retail strategy director Diana French, speaking on the same panel as Lima, said the backdrop for this Budget includes tax at its highest level since 1949.

“The tax environment is hard at the moment and is likely to get harder,” she said. “I do really feel like tax is a big conversation right now.”

Lima said regardless of what is announced in the Budget, it is “important we treat people as human beings.”

During the panel discussion, French also spoke positively about venture capital trusts (VCTs).

VCTs are investment vehicles that were set up to promote investment in small UK businesses that meet certain criteria.

To encourage support for these businesses, the government offer generous tax benefits..

In September 2023, French told Money Marketing that VCTs “are becoming a part of regular [financial] advice”.

French added that VCTs give investors access to companies that can grow very quickly.

Triple Point is a purpose-led investment management house that supports financial advisers, but does not actually provide advice to investors itself.

Industry duo Lima and Ian Cooke launched Strategic Wealth Partners, a financial planning practice targeted at high-net-worth clients across the UK.

The US Justice Department said in a new court filing that it may recommend a break up of Google (GOOG, GOOGL) as an antidote to unhealthy competition in the search engine market, showing just how far Washington is willing to go to rein in Big Tech.

DOJ lawyers used a 32-page document to outline a framework of options for DC District Court Judge Amit Mehta to consider, including “behavioral and structural remedies that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play, and Android to advantage Google search.”

Google in a blog post said that “DOJ’s radical and sweeping proposals risk hurting consumers, businesses, and developers.”

Its stock fell slightly in pre-market trading Wednesday.

The proposal is the first step from the Justice Department to break up a tech empire since it tried to do so more than two decades ago with Microsoft (MSFT).

That case — which the DOJ referenced in its Tuesday court filing — resulted in a 2002 settlement that opened the door to broader competition in the internet browser software market.

The move by DOJ also sends a signal to other tech giants currently facing antitrust cases from DOJ and other Washington regulators as part of a wide-ranging effort by the Biden administration to rein in what it views as anticompetitive behavior across a number of industries.

The administration has already alleged anticompetitive conduct against tech giants Apple (AAPL) and Amazon (AMZN) and claimed that Microsoft’s acquisition of gaming giant Activision Blizzard would create a gaming market monopoly.

The case against Google targeting its dominance in search resulted in a landmark decision in August, where DC District Court Judge Amit Mehta sided with DOJ and concluded Google illegally monopolized the online search engine market and the market for search text advertising.

Mehta concluded that Google’s agreements with browser providers and devices powered by Google’s Android operating system stifled rivals from entering and growing within the markets.

It will now be up to Mehta to decide what should happen now in a separate “remedies” phase of the trial that will likely start in 2025.

DOJ is expected to provide a more detailed document by Nov. 20 outlining these remedies. But the 32-page document filed late Tuesday offers several points of focus beyond forcing Google to sell parts of its business.

One has to do with contracts that secure Google’s search engine as a default on internet browsers and internet-connected devices that use Google’s Android operating system.

Story continues

Google pays as much as $26 billion per year to maintain its position on mobile devices like Apple (AAPL) and Samsung smartphones.

Justice Department lawyers said to prevent further harm they may seek to limit or terminate Google’s use of those contracts that use Chrome, Play and Android to advantage Google search, as well as “other revenue-sharing arrangements related to search and search-related products, potentially with or without the use of a choice screen.”

The DOJ could also ask the judge to force Google to share with rival browsers and search providers the data that it uses to refine its search algorithms, and limit the company’s dominance over search text ads.

DOJ suggested the judge should also consider blocking Google from illegally monopolizing related markets, in addition to the search and search text advertising markets.

It may ask the judge to force Google to give websites more ability to “opt out” of “any Google-owned artificial-intelligence product.”

Google pushed back on the DOJ’s suggestions.

“We believe that today’s blueprint goes well beyond the legal scope of the Court’s decision about Search distribution contracts,” Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post.

Google has promised to appeal. And Judge Mehta could hold off on any orders to alter Google’s behavior while it challenges his ruling in D.C.’s Circuit Court of Appeals.

The judge would lose the right to impose remedies if Google is found not to have broken the law on appeal.

And even if Google fails and is ordered to change its behavior, Judge Mehta could later adjust his orders to better ensure competition is restored.

Google faces antitrust challenges on other fronts. It is currently defending itself in a separate lawsuit from DOJ alleging a monopoly in the technology used to but and sell online ads.

And earlier this week another federal judge ordered Google to open up its app store as part of the resolution of a suit brought by Epic Games Inc.

DOJ cited that ruling in its Tuesday court filing that outlined a Google breakup as one possible remedy, noting that the judge in the Epic Games case said remedies should “bridge to moat” to combat network effects.

Click here for the latest technology news that will impact the stock market

Read the latest financial and business news from Yahoo Finance