January 28, 2026
How often should a financial adviser contact clients is something we hear advisers ask regularly, usually when they are trying to balance good client service with a growing workload.
The question rarely comes from a lack of care. In most firms we work with, advisers want clients to feel informed and supported. The difficulty is deciding what “enough” contact actually looks like in practice, especially when cases are live, providers are slow to respond, and admin pressure is already high.
At Plus Group, we support advisers with the client servicing and admin workflow that sits behind these conversations. That includes case coordination, provider chasing, LOA handling, and improving visibility so advisers are not relying on memory to decide when to update clients. When contact becomes planned rather than reactive, relationships tend to feel calmer on both sides.
This article looks at how often advisers should contact clients in real-world conditions, and why consistency and clarity matter more than fixed rules.
There is no universal rule for client contact frequency.
Clients differ in what they expect. Some want regular reassurance. Others are happy with minimal contact as long as things are progressing. Advisers also work in very different models, with varying client volumes, service propositions, and internal support.
What we see is that issues rarely come from contacting clients too little or too often. They come from inconsistency. When contact feels ad hoc or driven by problems rather than progress, clients start to feel uncertain.
Planned contact and reactive contact feel very different to clients.
Planned contact is predictable. Clients know when they will hear from their adviser and what those updates will usually cover. Even if progress is slow, the update itself provides reassurance.
Reactive contact tends to happen when a client chases or when something has gone wrong. Advisers often need to check internally before responding, which can introduce hesitation into the conversation.
This reactive pattern is closely linked to how admin backlogs damage client relationships, where uncertainty appears before anyone realises there is a wider issue.
Clients rarely ask for more contact just for the sake of it.
What they usually want is clarity. They want to know what has happened, what is being waited on, and when they are likely to hear next. Silence creates doubt far more quickly than a slower-moving case.
A common situation we see is a client saying they “just wanted to check in”, even though nothing has changed. What they are really asking is whether their case is still being actively looked after.
Advisers who update clients clearly and regularly tend to receive fewer chasers, even when progress takes time.
Inconsistent contact is rarely deliberate.
In most firms we work with, advisers start with good intentions. They plan to keep clients updated, but as more cases overlap, communication becomes harder to manage. Provider timelines vary. LOAs take longer than expected. Admin tasks stack up.
Without clear visibility, advisers rely on memory to decide who needs an update. Some clients hear back quickly. Others wait longer. Over time, that unevenness becomes noticeable.
This is often the same pressure advisers recognise in where financial advisers lose time in the week, as servicing tasks spill into gaps between meetings.
During active cases, clients generally expect more frequent contact.
They are waiting for outcomes and want reassurance that progress is being made. Even short updates can make a big difference, particularly when providers or third parties are involved.
What we see working well is advisers setting expectations early. Letting clients know how often they will hear from you, and under what circumstances, reduces uncertainty later on.
Problems tend to arise when advisers wait for something definitive to report, rather than updating on what is being chased or awaited.
Once a case is complete, contact usually becomes more structured.
Ongoing relationships are often managed through reviews, periodic check-ins, and communication around life events or changes in circumstances. Here, frequency matters less than predictability.
Clients want to know that they have not been forgotten between reviews. A clear servicing rhythm usually provides enough reassurance without creating unnecessary noise.
What we see causing friction is not low contact, but irregular contact that feels unplanned.
Provider delays are one of the biggest challenges to consistent client contact.
When advisers are not sure whether a provider has responded, they often hesitate to update clients. That hesitation leads to silence, which clients interpret as inaction.
A common example we see is an adviser waiting to hear back on an LOA before contacting the client, only to discover days later that the provider has not acknowledged it. The update then becomes an apology rather than an explanation.
This is why firms that address why LOA chasing costs so much time often see an immediate improvement in client communication.
Advisers often say they want to contact clients more confidently.
What usually helps is visibility rather than speed. When advisers can see what has been sent, what has been chased, and what is outstanding, updates become easier to give.
Without that visibility, advisers delay communication while they check internally. That delay is what clients tend to feel most strongly.
This is one reason firms focus on simplifying case management for financial advisers when trying to improve client servicing.
In some firms, the response to uncertainty is over-communication.
Advisers send frequent holding messages to reassure clients because they are not confident in the underlying process. While well intentioned, this can create its own pressure and make communication feel forced.
What we see working better is fewer, clearer updates based on reliable information. Clients usually prefer clarity over volume.
One of the most effective ways to manage contact frequency is to set expectations early.
When advisers explain how often clients will hear from them during a case, and what those updates will usually include, clients are less likely to chase. Even if timelines change, the communication feels controlled rather than reactive.
This approach works particularly well when supported by clear internal ownership and routine follow-ups, rather than relying on adviser memory.
Consistent client contact is difficult to maintain without support.
Advisers who feel most confident about communication usually have admin and servicing support that keeps progress visible and follow-ups routine. That allows advisers to update clients based on facts rather than assumptions.
This is also why it matters that outsourced support is used safely within an advice firm setup, so advisers remain informed without being pulled into day-to-day chasing.
How often a financial adviser should contact clients depends less on rules and more on structure.
When contact is planned, expectations are clear, and progress is visible, advisers communicate more confidently and clients feel more at ease. The goal is not constant communication, but reliable communication that fits naturally into the way the firm works. Over time, that consistency becomes part of the client experience, rather than something advisers have to consciously manage.
How often should a financial adviser contact clients during an active case?
During an active case, clients usually expect regular updates, even if progress is slow. Clear, short updates about what is being waited on often matter more than having something new to report.
How often should advisers stay in touch with ongoing clients?
For ongoing relationships, contact is usually tied to reviews, check-ins, and life events rather than frequent updates. What matters most is that the contact feels planned and predictable.
Why do clients chase for updates even when nothing has changed?
In most cases, clients are looking for reassurance rather than new information. Silence creates uncertainty more quickly than slow progress.
Is it possible to contact clients too often?
Yes, especially when updates are vague or repetitive. Clients tend to prefer fewer, clearer updates rather than frequent messages that do not add clarity.
Why does client communication often become reactive?
It usually happens when advisers lack visibility over case progress. Without clear information, advisers delay updates while they check internally.
How do provider delays affect client contact?
Provider delays make advisers hesitant to update clients. When LOAs or requests are not clearly tracked, communication often pauses until something definitive happens.
What helps advisers communicate more confidently with clients?
Visibility and clear ownership. When advisers can see exactly what is happening in a case, updates become easier and more confident to give.
Does outsourcing admin help improve client communication?
Yes, when it improves routine follow-ups and visibility. Outsourcing works best when advisers remain informed without handling the day-to-day chasing themselves.
Whether you need one-off expertise or tailored, ongoing support - we’re here to help you get it right.
Book a call
Back office support for financial advisers, firms and networks
