Have you heard of St James's Place

Tiggs_2

lol......just waiting to see what will get attacked first - the SJP partner being called an IFA, the fund, the advice.......choices choices

nrsql

>> the Stock Exchange had lost 20% in the last 6 months
??
when?

Poppy9

Tiggs wrote:

lol......just waiting to see what will get attacked first - the SJP partner being called an IFA, the fund, the advice.......choices choices

If I am reading this thread right, he is no longer a IFA? If so shouldn't he have told me?

I have dealt with him for 15 years, he's told me before when he's been tied to x company for mortgages etc.

dunstonh

Tiggs wrote:

lol......just waiting to see what will get attacked first - the SJP partner being called an IFA, the fund, the advice.......choices choices

Well you have got to admit, there is quite a few things wrong with that.

In January my IFA who I've dealt with for years advised me to switch my ISA from Skandia to SJP.

He isnt an IFA. He is a tied adviser to SJP and advised you to switch to SJP for that reason. SJP is a tied salesforce and not independent.

He told me not to panic that the Stock Exchange had lost 20% in the last 6 months,

Which stockmarket? Asia has suffered a bit but UK is around 5%-10% down depending on sectors.

I'm not convinced though. For the last 5 years Skandia hasn't failed to show me a better return than BS.

That has little to do with skandia or SJP but more to do with the funds you were and are invested in and the timescales. I would have to say that a move from Skandia to SJP was a bad one and not beneficial to you. You are almost certainly paying more in charges than before and there was no reason to move.

Due to my holiday commitments I get together with him till September but I think I'm going to withdraw from SJP. Are there any pitfall in this?

Withdrawing the funds would lose your ISA allowances. Switching to another provider would be the better move. Whilst there are potential for charges to be incurred again, with careful research and with the right provider, this can be avoided.

Poppy9

dunstonh wrote:

He isnt an IFA. He is a tied adviser to SJP and advised you to switch to SJP for that reason. SJP is a tied salesforce and not independent.

Which stockmarket? Asia has suffered a bit but UK is around 5%-10% down depending on sectors.

That has little to do with skandia or SJP but more to do with the funds you were and are invested in and the timescales. I would have to say that a move from Skandia to SJP was a bad one and not beneficial to you. You are almost certainly paying more in charges than before and there was no reason to move.

Withdrawing the funds would lose your ISA allowances. Switching to another provider would be the better move. Whilst there are potential for charges to be incurred again, with careful research and with the right provider, this can be avoided.

Thanks for the advice. I'm so disappointed in him for doing this to me. I will switch to another provider but now I have no one to advise me where to look. I will now also look for another IFA, but where to start.

dunstonh

Thanks for the advice. I'm so disappointed in him for doing this to me. I will switch to another provider but now I have no one to advise me where to look. I will now also look for another IFA, but where to start.

You should stick a complaint in as well. Indeed, check the suitability letter that was issued when he told you to switch to SJP and see if comparisons were done (including comparative projections) and the disadvantages and charges differences disclosed.

With all the best will in the world I cannot see how SJP could offer any advantages over Skandia's fund supermarket.

Tiggs, do you see what you are joining now? Also, are you sure you aren't going to lose clients when you tell them that you are not independent any more?

Poppy9

dunstonh wrote:

You should stick a complaint in as well. Indeed, check the suitability letter that was issued when he told you to switch to SJP and see if comparisons were done (including comparative projections) and the disadvantages and charges differences disclosed.

Ummh don't seem to have one of those letters. We were in his office remortgaging (we do so every 2 years or so to get a discounted rate) and he mentioned the SJP thing. He said that the funds were better managed and not fixed funds like I had with Skandia so it would be easier for the fund managers to switch to better performing funds etc. I'm trying to remember the conversation but I'm sure he said fees are the same.

When I see him I will ask to look at our file.

Who do I complain to?

This is awkward cos him and wife are friends too!!

Tiggs_2

dunstonh wrote:

Tiggs, do you see what you are joining now? Also, are you sure you aren't going to lose clients when you tell them that you are not independent any more?

lol....I'm well aware of the reputation of some SJP partners - but i'm not joining their firms.

My firm will remain my firm, my current branding will remain and i will alter very little with regards to how i work. SJP products will be the soloutions i sell but my approach to financial advice will remain the same......good advice, long term relationships, relaxed approach....no hard sell.

I have as little concern over the post above as you would over a post on a crappy IFA.....he's not you and you're not him!

As for clients...who know! exciting isnt it I tell them all 1st sep so i'll let you know.....my estimate is between 1-5 will consider it a negative move untill i explain my reasons......if more than 1 is left thinking its a negative move i'll be surprised - all the others will be fine/not care/be pleased my business is developing the way i want.


look at recent results of "who saw an IFA" surveys versus who REALLY saw an IFA, look at the posts above......its clear the de-polarisation has done nothing but muddy the waters - in that enviroment i belive clients will happily cling to anyone telling them a clear and positive story about their position in the market (which is what i will do)

As the old saying goes......

In the valley of the blind the bloke yelling "i can see" will always be followed........if he shouts confidently, he doesnt need to be able to see much

Tiggs_2

Poppy9 wrote:

Ummh don't seem to have one of those letters.

on a serious note.......this is what the FSA should be sorting out...not screwing around with de-polorisation.

EVERY single client of mine has to sign to confirm receipt of Key Facts...they have to sign the fact find as accurate and they have to sign a detailed "business checklist" to show they have no outstanding questions, have had and READ a suitablity letter and have their policy documnets and personal illustrations

How hard to make this a fixed rule for EVERY cleint file.

IFA, tied, whatever......its easy to skip the rules because no one checks if they are being followed! (until complaint time when, no doubt, they missing suitability letter will pop up from nowhere in the IFA file!)

EdInvestor

My firm will remain my firm, my current branding will remain and i will alter very little with regards to how i work....

It's easy to see how Poppy and others can be misled over this. The SJP "partnership" system appears to allow advisors to act like IFAs when they are in fact tied agents as far almost all products are concerned

What a disaster depolarisation is turning out to be.:(