Well I'm not sure we have both sides of the argument to make that assessment.  He must have signed documents agreeing to open the RSP.  The bank would have made no more income in selling a GIC insider or outside and RSP - so it is possible there was confusion in the language.  Also, while it's clear in the article that the individual did not have contribution room that subject may never have come up at the time of the investment.  I doubt there are many financial advisors willing to spend much time with someone who is  initially looking to invest 2 to 3 thousand dollars.   Lots of room for improvement, but a premature to hold the bank solely at fault.