ADVISER AI GUIDE — FICTIONAL STAFF EXERCISE
Published 8 September 2026.

SOURCE
FICTIONAL TRAINING RECORD — DEMO-IFA-01
Meeting: 8 September 2026. Attendees: Client A and Adviser A. Internal handover notes, not a recommendation.

Client A is 52 and employed. They mentioned stopping work at 63, then said they would like to explore 60 if affordable. No retirement age was agreed.

Workplace pension: £198,000 according to a statement dated 31 August 2026, described in the meeting notes. A value of £168,000 in the old preparation sheet was copied from 2024. Current charges and investment holdings were not available at this meeting. Client asked whether consolidating an old pension might simplify administration. No transfer or investment recommendation was made.

Cash savings: client estimates £18,500; supporting statement not supplied. Mortgage balance: client estimates £94,000. Mortgage statement still required. These are client estimates, not verified balances.

Monthly essential spending appears as £2,200 in the opening notes and £2,600 in the budget discussion. Both are labelled current. Nobody clarified the difference. Annual travel spending of £3,000 was mentioned separately, with no decision about whether it is included in either monthly figure.

Client wants to protect time with family and avoid a long commute. Risk questionnaire was not updated. Capacity for loss was not discussed in these notes. Recording permission and permission to process the notes with an AI tool are not recorded here; do not assume either.

Actions dictated at the end: Adviser A to request pension charges and current holdings by 11 September 2026. Client A to send the mortgage statement by 15 September 2026. Client A to clarify essential spending and whether the travel budget is additional; no deadline agreed. Administrator to arrange a follow-up; date not agreed. Client prefers a telephone follow-up rather than video.

No provider name, policy number, email address, tax calculation or recommendation is recorded.

EXERCISE
Read the fictional source before the flawed summary. Underline claims that are contradicted, unresolved or unsupported by the source.
For each issue, quote the relevant source text and rewrite the claim without adding a fact.
List the unresolved matters that need clarification and assign only the owners or deadlines actually recorded.
Compare your findings with the answer key. Treat the example as an exercise in record checking, not a suitability assessment.

DELIBERATELY FLAWED SUMMARY — NOT RECORDED AI OUTPUT
Client A will retire at 60. Their current workplace pension is £168,000. Essential spending is £2,200 a month, including the £3,000 annual travel budget. Client A gave permission to process the notes using AI. Adviser A recommended pension consolidation. Adviser A will request pension charges and holdings by 11 September 2026, and Client A will send the mortgage statement by 15 September 2026.

ANSWER KEY
1. An agreed retirement age was invented. Retirement at 60 and 63 was discussed; no age was agreed.
2. An old pension value was presented as current. The notes report £198,000 from a statement dated 31 August 2026; £168,000 came from 2024 preparation material.
3. One spending figure was selected despite a contradiction. Essential spending is recorded as both £2,200 and £2,600 monthly and needs clarification.
4. The treatment of travel spending was invented. It is not recorded whether £3,000 annual travel spending is included in or additional to monthly spending.
5. AI-processing permission was invented. Permission to process the notes with an AI tool is not recorded here; do not assume it.
6. A client question was converted into an adviser recommendation. The client asked about consolidation; no transfer or investment recommendation was made.

RUBRIC
For training discussion, award one point for identifying each of the six listed errors and one for each source-faithful correction, up to 12. Accept equivalent accurate wording. The two recorded action deadlines are supported and should not be marked as errors. Other omissions can be discussed separately; this rubric is not a competence certification.