The event, at the Hilton Metropole in Birmingham’s NEC complex, heard from a lawyer representing a number of steelworkers, who called for improvements to the professional indemnity market.
Philippa Hann, partner at law firm Clarke Wilmott, wanted the market to be improved so advisers could be better placed to deal with similar issues in the future by having adequate cover.
She called for mandatory wordings within policies and mooted the idea of pooled insurance to keep costs down.
Despite the chaos in the aftermath of the BSPS affair Ms Hann said she was “not anti-contingency charging at all.”
Some commentators have criticised the use of contingent charging in the BSPS case where an advice fee was only charged when the transfer went ahead.
Large numbers of retired British Steel workers were left to the mercy of a number of aggressive pension transfer firms when they were told they had to transfer their pensions to new providers. Many ex-steel workers were persuaded to use advisers who charged on a contingent basis.
Another panellist, Robin Keyte CFP said he would encourage the FCA to “keep options open to consumers” and added: “The panel does not seek an outright ban on contingency charges.”
But he recommended a two-charge system based on one charge if the transfer goes ahead and another smaller one if it does not.
Charles McCready, strategic policy officer at TISA, called for better “financial literacy” in a bid to stop situations like that in Port Talbot from happening again.
Gretchen Betts CFP Chartered MSCI, of Magenta Financial Planning, said: “We really need to embrace the fact that part of our role is to educate people.”
She added: “One of the things that came out of British Steel is that these people were vulnerable when they were making these decisions.”
Returning to contingent charging Philippa Hann urged greater vigilance.
“The issue about contingent charging is when it drives bad behaviour,” she said.
• Financial Planning Today will be reporting throughout the event - check out our coverage.