Significant changes to RE Exam

We recently came across an article by Dr Des Leatt an Education Consultant, on the revised and updated Fit and Proper Requirements from the Registrar of the FSB with the publication of Board Notice 194 of 2017 on 15 December 2017, with variable implementation dates, which we thought would be interesting to share with you.

According to Dr Leatt, this draws to an end a period of nearly three years of public and corporate-wide consultation which our Regulator engaged in. 

A careful and thorough review

“Included in this review and consultative process was a careful and thorough review of the Qualifying Criteria (content requirements) upon which our Regulatory Exams for key Individuals (RE1) and Representatives (RE5) are based,” said Dr Leatt. 

“I have been very close to this process since the launch of these Regulatory exams in 2010 and I must say that the review process has now provided us with a more in-depth but less repetitive set of Qualifying Criteria. There are still 16 Tasks or sections for the RE1 exam and 8 for the RE5 exam – while approximately 50-60% of the Qualifying Criteria have remained much the same they will need updating based upon these latest Fit and Proper requirements. That said, there are a significant number of new Qualifying Criteria and of course the updated FICA legislation is now incorporated, where applicable,” commented Dr Leatt. 

Important dates to be aware of

According to Dr Leatt, the following dates which you need to be made aware of: 

• The revised and updated Qualifying Criteria upon which the Regulatory Exams are based, come in effect 1 April 2018. Put simply this means that I will be working around the clock to ensure that fully updated and revised, credible RE1 and RE5 study material and practice MCQ questions will be available as from 1 April 2018 to cover the new requirements.
• With effect from 1 April 2018, it is no longer required that a key individual write and complete BOTH the RE1 and the RE5 Exams. I have long argued that it was repetitive for key individuals to write and pass both the RE1 and RE5 exams – so I heartily endorse this move.
• A key element of the above Fit and Proper review was to establish credible product training (previously called, Second Level Regulatory Examinations), now referred to as Class of Business Training and Product Specific Training, and this is a key element of the revised Fit and Proper requirements.
• Likewise, the finalisation of the FSBs requirements w.r.t Continuous Professional Development (CPD), is very important. 

Preparing for changes

All in all, Dr Leatt believes the revision of Fit and Proper requirements has led to important changes to the Regulatory Exam requirements and therefore, of course the Regulatory Exams, the study material and bank of MCQ questions. 

“The above changes are a significant and an important step in our regulatory framework. I am currently undertaking a gap analysis of the current and proposed new Qualifying Criteria and am quite certain that the “new” RE1 and RE5 content and resulting regulatory exams will be more difficult. That said, the revisions add much value to the work of the sector and prepare the ground for changes in our regulatory environment via the RDR and Twin Peaks and related developments which are around the corner,” continued Dr Leatt. 

“Common sense suggests that taking the exams before 1 April 2018 will be wise and I do recommend and encourage those who need to complete these exams to do so sooner rather than later i.e. before 1 April 2018,” advised Dr Leatt.
Those needing to write should do so sooner than later as any re-writes will also have to be done before 1 April 2018, so time is of the essence. 

Editor’s Thoughts:
When the FSB made the announcements that it would be moving towards a fit and proper principles approach, there were a lot of questions. However, as Dr Leatt pointed out, the changes are a significant and an important step in our regulatory framework. One that will ensure key individuals and representatives comply and continue to comply with industry regulation. Do you agree? If you have any questions please comment below, interact with us on Twitter at @fanews_online or email me - [email protected].

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

 

Submit Comment