AIFA has raised concerns over the MAS funding model and whether the evidence used to demonstrate its effectiveness is appropriate.
It also argues that MAS should provide information but not regulated advice.
Policy director at AIFA, Chris Hannant, said: “We support the overall objectives of MAS, and acknowledge the value of financial guidance for those seeking basic support.
“However, we have yet to see evidence that MAS is meeting its objectives, and we are unconvinced that a predominantly online service will achieve the necessary behavior change in the public’s approach to personal finance.
“We do not think the funding model for MAS is appropriate. They have a blank cheque from the financial services sector without any accountability to it. In its submission, The IFA Centre has said that the Money Advice Service’s (MAS’s) use of the word ‘advice’ devalues the importance of regulated advice.
The body also said that the use of this term breaches ‘clear, fair and not misleading’ requirements. Furthermore, the IFA centre said that the information provided by MAS is simplistic, potentially to the point of misleading, and that its comparison tables do not reflect actual terms on offer from providers, especially in the very sensitive field of annuity purchase.
The Treasury Select Committee said last month that it would look into the salaries paid to the MAS staff following questions raised by government officials over MAS chief executive Tony Hobman’s £250,000 salary.
