mvr, market value reduction

jem16

whiteflag wrote: »

Yes but I agree with Dunstonh on that as well . In this case neither I nor Dh actually know what paperwork has been given to Ruth.

Why don't we know what paperwork she has been sent?

Let's take the paperwork from the adviser out of the equation for a minute and look at the paperwork from Aviva which we know must have been sent.

I have, as I said, the Aviva Investment Bond (issue in 2006). I received a 9 page document which detailed exactly what I had applied (through my IFA) for. It detailed the amount invested, the charges, the exact funds and their percentages and included a "Right to Cancel" notice within 30 days.

I was also sent a policy document that was 22 pages long. Now in my case I don't have a with-profits fund but the documentation covers every possible option.

Section 6 specifically covers the With-profit fund and the conditions are detailed over 5 pages with conditions a to o. Sections i to o all cover the MVR and under what circumstances it would be applied.

Now I know it doesn't make interesting and captivating reading but it's there to be read and people have to take the responsibility of doing so. Any questions and you go back to the adviser for clarification within the 30 days. It's a two way process - you have to work with the adviser.

My question to other readers was what exactly was Ruth's complaint about not the timing of the complaint.

Ruth's complaint seems to be twofold.

First she complained about not being told about an MVR. I'm afraid Aviva's own literature says otherwise. It's covered through 3 pages worth of conditions.

The it changed to complaining that she didn't think she had the plan she thought she was sold when it appears that she probably has. Section 6o mentions the guarantee to return at least the Payment to the Company on or at any time after the 5th policy anniversary.

ruthwilliams

I came on here for advice which i have received, i did not expect to be insulted after being called a try it on with my own money.

thank you for all of your advice, some have said that i acted hastily, however, if you were told that after thinking you have an investment that you don't, then you would be angry too.

some have said that i should have tried to dig deeper, which i did and still got the same reply.

it may be that the people at aviva i spoke to did not know much about my policy throughout five different departments by the way, which does not fill me with confidence.

i feel that aviva should not have told me that i can do nothing, they said that if my investment loses money and gets reduced to £1000 or even worse, then that is all i will get after five years. that is not a guarantee.

when various people tell you the same thing despite what this forum says, as with respect, i do not have any investment with any members here. i only have an investment with aviva and they are telling me different to the these posts.

anyway, i can now only follow the procedure and hope that this matter gets resolved.

thank you for any supportive e-mails and for offers of advice.
appologies for not being as financially savvy as some.

whiteflag_3

parcival wrote: »

There was nothing at all that even hinted at the possible severity of MVR's or how long they could be in force for.

Remember this was an advisor!!!!!

Yes I think at the very least you would expect any decent advisor to at least point out the existence of possible MVRs. But then again, if they did they probably wouldnt get a sale.;)

dunstonh

it may be that the people at aviva i spoke to did not know much about my policy throughout five different departments by the way, which does not fill me with confidence.

They dont. The front line telephone staff get very basic information supplied to them. You often have to tell them what the product is and what terms it has. That is fairly normal though. You dont put well qualified staff on the phones.

i feel that aviva should not have told me that i can do nothing, they said that if my investment loses money and gets reduced to £1000 or even worse, then that is all i will get after five years. that is not a guarantee.

You can do lots with the product. However, it is not within the remit of the Aviva person to tell you what to do. The bank/building society or any other IFA is the one that has the remit to do that.

thank you for all of your advice, some have said that i acted hastily, however, if you were told that after thinking you have an investment that you don't, then you would be angry too.

You do have the investment you think you have. The fund you have has a guarantee after 5 years. All we asked is that you checked the suitability report. That would tell you exactly what you have and the risk warnings. It would also tell you the chances of success with any complaint you make. Instead, you went straight to complaint. Unfortunately, complaints in the case of financial advice are held against advisers whether valid or not. So, this person could have done everything right and verified exactly what you have with you and you would be satisfied with that. Instead, they now have a complaint on their record. If the complaint was valid and fair then its absolutely right to complain. However, as I have said, in my opinion you jumped to complaint too quickly.

whiteflag_3

ruthwilliams wrote: »

appologies for not being as financially savvy as some.

you dont have to apologise Ruth, this forum is here to help people like you although some seem to use it as a platform for demonstrating how smart they are.

I woul also urge you to pursue your complaint because although Dunstonh says he is an IFA in his signature it does not mean he knows everything, he doesnt know all the facts in your case so what he says is just his opinion (which of course hes entitled to).

magpiecottage

I think DunstonH is broadly correct.

Ruth knew she had a product which provided a guarantee at the end of five years but not before. She would have been provided with a Key Features document which included a "Your Commitment" section. Although I have not seen it, I would anticipate this is where it was explained.

It would also have included a section entitled "Risk Factors" which is where both the penalties for early encashment.

So I think she will have an uphill struggle arguing that she did not know.

She might be able to argue that the need for some of the money after 2 years should have been foreseen by the adviser but would need to have evidence of that.

What she might have ground for complaint about is if she contacted Aviva about a partial withdrawal and they mentioned the penalty but not the MVA.

In that case, she would have made the decision to go ahead based on flawed information. However, such a complaint would not be against the original adviser but the person giving the incomplete information. Arguably not his or her fault because, as discussed, they will not be particularly highly trained - but either way, responsibility rests with Aviva.

If such a complaint was upheld, the MVA might be reversed but not the penalty.

whiteflag_3

magpiecottage wrote: »

I think DunstonH is broadly correct.

Ruth knew she had a product which provided a guarantee at the end of five years but not before. She would have been provided with a Key Features document which included a "Your Commitment" section. Although I have not seen it, I would anticipate this is where it was explained.

It would also have included a section entitled "Risk Factors" which is where both the penalties for early encashment.

So I think she will have an uphill struggle arguing that she did not know.

She might be able to argue that the need for some of the money after 2 years should have been foreseen by the adviser but would need to have evidence of that.

What she might have ground for complaint about is if she contacted Aviva about a partial withdrawal and they mentioned the penalty but not the MVA.

In that case, she would have made the decision to go ahead based on flawed information. However, such a complaint would not be against the original adviser but the person giving the incomplete information. Arguably not his or her fault because, as discussed, they will not be particularly highly trained - but either way, responsibility rests with Aviva.

Scary stuff!

Astonishing to to see someone with your credentials making sweeping statements without any knowledge of what went on. Ive checked the post and I cant see anywhere where the OP said she was given a key features document or suitability report? Please dont make me laugh by saying its a requirement. Like I said earlier in the thread I have actual/ real life experience of people (mainly over 60) that have been victims of bank salesman and they dont always give keyfacts documents/key features or disclose commission at point of sale.

What is your experience of dealing with Aviva staff? How do you know they would not be particularly highly trained? Its a strange notion that they would employ people with no product knowledge. Im surprised Dh has knowledge of their DIRECT staff as well- Why would he or any of his clients need to call them?

It seems to me that the IFA and the IFA compliance consultant are being a bit hasty - something that DH criticised the OP of doing.

dunstonh

I cant see anywhere where the OP said she was given a key features document or suitability report?

You cannot see anywhere where the OP has said she was not given these. However, we do know that Aviva post an illustration and KFD with the cancellation rights. So, even if the adviser didnt issue any documentation at all, we know that Aviva did.

Multiple times on this thread, the OP was asked about the suitability report.

What is your experience of dealing with Aviva staff? How do you know they would not be particularly highly trained? Its a strange notion that they would employ people with no product knowledge. Im surprised Dh has knowledge of their DIRECT staff as well- Why would he or any of his clients need to call them?

I'm more surprised you have no knowledge of Aviva service levels. However, ignoring the fact you are being intentionally argumentative, it is well documented on these forums by people that have spoken to Aviva and not been told correct information or more commonly not the full information.

It seems to me that the IFA and the IFA compliance consultant are being a bit hasty - something that DH criticised the OP of doing.

And you are making the opposite assumptions with no basis of fact known. I cannot believe for one minute you know nothing about the Aviva With Profits fund.

whiteflag_3

However, ignoring the fact you are being intentionally argumentative,

Dh just because someone has a different view to you doesnt mean they are being intentionally argumentative.

And you are making the opposite assumptions with no basis of fact known.

Yes but with respect Im not advising the OP not to complain. The OP has nothing to lose by complaining but could potentially lose something by following your advice. I have never said I know the facts , Im giving my view based on what I have seen for myself.

I cannot believe for one minute you know nothing about the Aviva With Profits fund

Stopped using them years ago because of their poor service.:D
However I wasnt aware that the DIRECT calls from the public go to the IFA call centres as well now, when I dealt with them they had different centres.

whiteflag_3

dunstonh wrote: »

However, ignoring the fact you are being intentionally argumentative, it is well documented on these forums by people that have spoken to and not been told correct information or more commonly not the full information.Aviva

So given what you say about Aviva staff why you do seem so unwilling to concede the Principality Building Society sales staff might have not given the OP the correct information or more commonly not the full information.

You always say avoid saleforces and I thought it was because they have a reputation for putting sales above everything and being economical with the facts sometimes.