Standard Life 10 year savings plan – MASSIVE shortfall

prowla

Basically it is a con, because boom and bust is a natural cycle and things cannot go on going up continually..
A man who proclaims an end to boom and bust is a liar.
If you buy in the boom and sell in the bust, then you will lose out.
The reason it is a con is because the people selling it during the boom are taking advantage of the feel good factor to get you to put your money in.
Sadly, it is also stated that the value can go down as well as up, so it is buyer beware!

digannio

We all know how these things are sold. You're told it's a fantastic product and shown some of the growth you could make and told that it is invested in safe areas and very well managed with a great history. I don't think anyone is expected to know all the ins and outs of where the money is placed and it's harsh in the extreme to blame someone if they haven't done an in-depth analysis of all of this. And I don't think anyone on here is really in a position to know exactly how well managed or not this guy's cash been across the spread of investments and whether it could have done better in all the circumstances. Except to say that it has unluckily had to weather the mother of all recessions.
What we do know is that after taking professional advice he has carefully put money aside over a long period of time and in the end would have done better in some building society with the crappiest rate on the planet.

parcival

Agreed - it's a joke. Might be worth looking at the stuff / letters etc that were provided by the IFA. They might have made 'unrealistic' claims about the product or the return - you might be able to complain on the basis of mis-selling.

dunstonh

What we do know is that after taking professional advice he has carefully put money aside over a long period of time and in the end would have done better in some building society with the crappiest rate on the planet.

In that 10 year period it has been the case. Had he started 2 years earlier it would have been a different matter. Indeed, in most 10 year periods going back in time they would have been better than cash. However, this was one of the worst 10 year periods in generations.

Agreed - it's a joke. Might be worth looking at the stuff / letters etc that were provided by the IFA. They might have made 'unrealistic' claims about the product or the return - you might be able to complain on the basis of mis-selling.

The projection rates were set by the FSA, not the IFA. Complaints about investment returns are not allowed. So, unless you think a complaint about not having a crystal ball is a goer, then its not worth it.

In_for_a_penny

bendix wrote: »

Why is it a 'con'?

If you and your wife didnt know what it was being invested in and haven't shown any interest in those assets over the corresponding ten year period, it's hardly Standard Life's fault, is it.

It is an investment. Not a guarantee. Given the UK sharemarket is down around 16% over that ten year period, you have no complaint at all. Standard Life have - frankly - done an excellent job getting any return for you at all.

There is no point raging against others when it is you who failed to understand the product you bought.

Bendix, with due respect, neither my wife or I are any type of financial 'expert'. Nor claim to be. That was the purpose of acquiring the services of an IFA. It's not simply a case of not "showing an interest" or "it is you who failed to understand the product you bought", as you put it. But thanks for your quaintly put remarks.

jack_spratt_2

The raft of regulation that has been imposed over the years has to be paid by someone and you can bet it will not be the shareholders who will shoulder the burden it has to paid from somewhere and it is the investors who pay it !!

Yes the financial industry needed cleaning up but a sledgehammer was taken to crack a nut if you know what I mean !!

Just my thoughts

dunstonh

The raft of regulation that has been imposed over the years has to be paid by someone and you can bet it will not be the shareholders who will shoulder the burden it has to paid from somewhere and it is the investors who pay it !!

I read somewhere not too long back that around every £10 of income, £3 goes on covering compliance/regulation.

Yes the financial industry needed cleaning up but a sledgehammer was taken to crack a nut if you know what I mean !!

How true and whilst that happened it didnt spot where the true dangers were.

bilbo_2

my SL endowment has just matured

payed in 1200
maturity value 1207

LOL

Jonbvn

dunstonh wrote: »

In that 10 year period it has been the case. Had he started 2 years earlier it would have been a different matter. Indeed, in most 10 year periods going back in time they would have been better than cash. However, this was one of the worst 10 year periods in generations.

Which goes to show that diversity is the key.

Cook_County

So why was the policy not sold in Year 5 or 6 when pretty much everyone was saying to sell these kind of policies while the market was at a peak?