complaint about ifa

dunstonh

A director is effectively an employee of the company and the company will have to pay up. However, he is required to have PI cover (liability insurance) where the insurance company pay up in upheld complaints. The insurance will have an excess that will vary depending on the PI provider and past claims of the company etc. Typically the excesses range from £1000 to £4000. £2500 is a common figure. So, regardless of the redress payment, the company is going to have to pay the same excess whether the redress payment is £4000 or £40,000. However, the complaint will impact on his future PI premiums.

The complaint was that he invested above your risk profile (quite a lot above). Is the FOS comparing what you would have got on a more cautious spread as it doesnt appear they are comparing to cash?

whiteflag_3

company etc. Typically the excesses range from £1000 to £4000. £2500 is a common figure. So, regardless of the redress payment, the company is going to have to pay the same excess whether the redress payment is £4000 or £40,000. However, the complaint will impact on his future PI premiums.

but of course Dh , you making a huge assumption that the PI insurers will pick up the claim!

the thread is pointless unlit Westy posts what really happened

westy69

dunstonh wrote: »

A director is effectively an employee of the company and the company will have to pay up. However, he is required to have PI cover (liability insurance) where the insurance company pay up in upheld complaints. The insurance will have an excess that will vary depending on the PI provider and past claims of the company etc. Typically the excesses range from £1000 to £4000. £2500 is a common figure. So, regardless of the redress payment, the company is going to have to pay the same excess whether the redress payment is £4000 or £40,000. However, the complaint will impact on his future PI premiums.

The complaint was that he invested above your risk profile (quite a lot above). Is the FOS comparing what you would have got on a more cautious spread as it doesnt appear they are comparing to cash?

I cant really explain what the FOS are saying very easily and i'm sorry i dont want to post it all at the moment as its ongoing. It is similar to what you are saying but to be honest i dont completely understand how the ombudsman has arrived at the figure he has arrived at hence i will be taking it as far as i can.
He certainly hasnt explianed it in a clear jargon free manner lets put it that way.
What i need to find out is how i avoid him making a final decision before i have an explanation which i can understand and accept, if that doesnt happen i will be complaining that i am being treated unfairly, i wont be complianing about the decision as in essence he has upheld my complaint i will be complaining about how much his view differs from the adjudicators and how the redress can be so low.

Lokolo

westy - people like you really annoy me....

You give half the gossip without saying the real juicy bits :mad: :D:D:D

---

When it is all over I will be spamming you with PMs until you tell the whooole story.. k?

EdInvestor

whiteflag wrote: »

the thread is pointless unlit Westy posts what really happened

Complaint details

Sold a 100k investment bond mostly in global property funds around a year ago.Ouch.

Lokolo

EdInvestor wrote: »

Complaint details

Sold a 100k investment bond mostly in global property funds around a year ago.Ouch.

Thanks. Interesting read.

whiteflag_3

Dooooooooooooooonut wrote: »

Christ this one sounds a retard even for an IFA!

yes, unlike everyone else on the planet he failed to spot that property was a bad investment, and that unlike the rest of us, he was unaware of the toxic debt that was about to put the world into ecomomic meltdown.:rolleyes:

whiteflag_3

Dooooooooooooooonut wrote: »

Never mind the toxic debt (everyone in finance or even read the bloody papers knew about that too by then but never mind) .

Me and him both then, total retards! We both missed the toxic debt thing in late 2006!


Get a grip you clown the advice was given and based on what was going on in 2006 not now.

What were you doing then Deemy?

whiteflag_3

Dooooooooooooooonut wrote: »

I was under the impression it was given in early 2008.

In that case I retract my earlier assertion about a special form of stupidity and put it down to the usual stupidity of misunderstanding risk

so not a retard after all, just an average human being that fell for the hype at the time.

Is that such a crime?

Its easy for people like to you doughring to throw stones with the benefit of hindsight.

I think its a bit rich that this IFA has to cough up for not spotting stuff the regulators couldnt spot either.

EdInvestor

I think the money was invested in early 2007, but the commercial property market was already beginning to fall at that point, even if the credit crunch was 6 months off.

In any case, more than 70% in global share-based CP funds is no-one's idea of a cautious portfolio, so it's not suprising the FOS has found in favour of westy's complaint.