Recording telephone calls with clients may provide greater protection for advisers if a dispute or complaint arises, the Personal Finance Society says.

The FCA has proposed extending the requirement of taping to advisers in a bid to quickly resolve ombudsman complaints.

But the idea has sparked a number of concerns among Financial Planners and advisers, with some fearing the impact on their firm’s reputation and the extra regulatory burden.

PFS chief executive Keith Richards said: “While the initial reaction from advisers may be that the proposed changes represent an additional regulatory burden, in the long-term it might actually deliver process efficiencies and greater protection for advisers, especially in the event of a dispute or complaint.”

Mr Richards said, however, FOS complaints data shows that a number of recently upheld consumer claims in respect of life and pensions, relate to advice given more than five years earlier.

He said: “This potentially undermines the seemingly arbitrary five-year period over which advisers would be required to retain their records.”

He also acknowledged that some smaller advisers will be “concerned about the impact on the personal nature of their brand” and that some consumers may be inclined to withhold personal information as a result of their conversations being recorded.

The Association of Professional Financial Advisers is unhappy with the proposal, saying it will be particularly costly for small firms.

But Mr Richards did not necessarily agree.

He said: “As the FCA has pointed out, the cost to install and maintain telephone recording equipment has reduced significantly since the FSA introduced the requirement to tape in 2008, and data retention costs have also fallen since the development of cloud storage.”

For many firms where advisers conduct all of their advice face-to-face, it will be business as usual, Mr Richards believes.

However, he stressed that advisers must be offered the “support and information required to implement a system that suits their particular technological needs” including help adapting their back office and compliance procedures in accordance with the new requirements.

The proposal has come as part of plans for implementation of the revised Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II).