I had a chat with a couple of people in a general discussion but...

I had a chat with a couple of people in a general discussion but we did not discuss it directly. From the information I got, they (Interprac) are pretty big on compliance and have recently reiterated it to planners.

From what I understand they don't see RC as a negative to them but a negative to the industry as most of the cases are against the large players and their consultants or planners but the smaller players tend to be closer to the client and unlikely to have been using a cookie cutter approach that was that wrong. These are my understandings that I got from a discussion with my tax accountant and a general discussion with a person who has insight into Interprac. Not sure if the amounts involved would not be a lot less as well and therefore not a juicy story to tell the world. Nothing would, in my opinion, preclude them from having a less than scrupulous broker/planner in their midst - however unlikely Interprac would be the target of any RC enquiry.

As regards commission vs fee for service - I have asked before and got that it depends on the style of the planner. They are providing planners with a resource base so that they can do their job better and with more assurance and products to offer. I think Interprac can be either a fee base to the person affiliated with them or can take a share of income.

To make sure I was correct with my note taking I looked financial planning on their website and it looked consistent with the above. Reading some of the testimonials looked like you can gain a view from that.

http://interprac.com.au/financial-planning/becoming-a-financial-planner