Pearson LLQP New Attempt

Comprehensive and Detailed in Depth Explanation with Exact Extract from Documents and Guides:

TheIFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law)references FINTRAC (Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada) guidelines, requiring agents to identify third parties when funds come from a joint account not solely owned by the client. Diane’s $120,000 cheque from a joint account with Geoffrey triggers the third-party determination rule, necessitating a third-party form (A). Reporting to FINTRAC (B) applies to cash transactions over $10,000, not cheques here. The Social Insurance card is acceptable ID, so C is incorrect. Doing nothing (D) violates FINTRAC compliance. A is correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed in Depth Explanation with Exact Extract from Documents andGuides:

TheIFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law)states that only licensed agents can receive compensation for insurance referrals, and payments contingent on sales are prohibited for unlicensed individuals. Jamie is no longer an agent, and the flat fee is contingent on sales, violating regulatory rules. Her past licensure (A) doesn’t permit this, client awareness (B) doesn’t override the licensing requirement, and the flat fee structure (D) isn’t the issue—contingency is. This protects against unlicensed solicitation, making C correct.

PIPEDA governs how private sector organizations, including insurance companies, collect, use, and disclose personal information in Canada. This Act mandates that insurers adhere to strict guidelines to ensure the protection of client information​. Nikita is correct in assuring Sergei that his personal information is protected by privacy legislation, as PIPEDA sets out these obligations for private sector companies handling personal data​.

Comprehensive and Detailed in Depth Explanation with Exact Extract from Documents and Guides:

TheIFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law)explains that the policy owner has the right to surrender a policy for its cash value, but an irrevocable beneficiary’s consent is required for changes affecting their interest (e.g., cancellation). Here, Edmond is the co-owner (with Harris, who is incapacitated), giving him authority to act. Becky, as irrevocable beneficiary, must consent to the surrender. Charlie is a successor owner, effective only upon Harris’s death, and Aden is the insured, not an owner. Thus, only Edmond (co-owner) and Becky (irrevocable beneficiary) can execute the transaction, making B correct.