Simon, a new client, calls Nicole, a Financial Advisor, on the phone. "The stock market will never recover from this global depression," says Simon. A catastrophe has occurred! As soon as possible, I'd like to convert my retirement fund's asset allocation to one that is entirely in cash. "Lucy, my wife, should have her retirement funds converted to cash as well." Their combined superannuation amount is $480,000, and they are both 52 years old. Nicole tells Simon not to panic, emphasises the long-term nature of superannuation investments, and stresses the dangers of putting all of their money in cash at this chaotic moment. Nicole.
Nicole schedules a meeting with both Simon and Lucy for the following day, advising Simon, "Don't panic or do anything today—have let's a look at how to manage this tomorrow." I called my super fund and altered my asset allocation to 100% cash' Simon said the next day in his meeting. Lucy, too, converted hers to cash. However, looking back, I see that I may have acted rashly and at the wrong place.

Specifically, has Nicole violated any of the FASEA Code of Ethics' most fundamental principles by failing to comply with Simon's directions when he called her?

 

Examine if Nicole did right by not recommending that Simon adjust the asset allocation in light of the company's basic values.