Retirement - do I need an IFA?

dunstonh

Thats shocking!!! - can you give some more background to these cases and how their advice and was dire. Im sure the IFP etc would be interested to hear about this as well.

The worst was the use of inappropriate investments for risk profile. Mainly through the use of specialist investments and putting too much in them (inexperienced investor with around 40% in specialist high risk investments). Charging over £30,000 to do so. One of the others was an RU64 breach where he used a standard life SIPP but used internal funds at 1.5% which were on the stakeholder at 1% but also charged over £7000 to the capital. He is now out of business. I can't cover the other as although the FOS have upheld it, he has appealed. Plus, if it ends up being successful, it could pave the way for many more complaint to follow suit.

Can you also reply to my post #24 please

In summary, I feel it is overrated for the clients I deal with. Whilst you can generate very attractive reports and they can provide very good shortfall analysis, the cashflow forecasting element is only as good as their provided data and a range of assumptions that rarely come out to be correct. The idea is fine and if you happen to have a stable client who is accurate on data and follows through on what they say then it can work. There are bits of it that work very well but it is effectively a front end to a spreadsheet. If you are using it well and it works for you and your clients like it then good. I am not going to criticise your model as its working for you.

The bit I am criticising, is that those that tend to use it slag off those that don't and make out that not using it is wrong. Given the number of clients that have used it before and have told me that they felt it was just an exercise and found no benefit from it it in the long run, I am clearly not wrong. Just as you are not wrong for using it with those that do find a benefit from it.

feesarefare

dunstonh wrote: »

The worst was the use of inappropriate investments for risk profile. Mainly through the use of specialist investments and putting too much in them (inexperienced investor with around 40% in specialist high risk investments). Charging over £30,000 to do so. One of the others was an RU64 breach where he used a standard life SIPP but used internal funds at 1.5% which were on the stakeholder at 1% but also charged over £7000 to the capital. He is now out of business. I can't cover the other as although the FOS have upheld it, he has appealed. Plus, if it ends up being successful, it could pave the way for many more complaint to follow suit.

Nothing that could be attributed to the cashflow forecasting Im glad to see.

Its a shame that there are some CFPs out there that seem to do everthing except "financial planning" - using the title as a licence to get away with murder. Its frustrating in the same way as those with G60 used it as a way of justifying any pension transfer.

In summary, I feel it is overrated for the clients I deal with.

Perhaps it might have been better for you to say that in the first place! You made a very sweeping statement.

I'd be the first to admit its not for everyone - probably 2 in 5 new appts dont proceed because of that.

Whilst you can generate very attractive reports and they can provide very good shortfall analysis, the cashflow forecasting element is only as good as their provided data and a range of assumptions that rarely come out to be correct

Possibly but a plan to work from is better than nothing- businesses do them all the time , why not individuals

As I said its only one of the tools we use.

The idea is fine and if you happen to have a stable c

The funny thing is when you use a system like Truth all the time you find that most clients are "stable"

The bit I am criticising, is that those that tend to use it slag off those that don't

And those that dont appear to slag off those that do!!

So its not the system its the people that use it you have a problem with.

Given the number of clients that have used it before and have told me that they felt it was just an exercise and found no benefit from it it in the long run, I am clearly not wrong

Norfolk must have been a hot bed for lifetime cashflows for years as Truth only have 900 licences nationally and Ive yet to meet either at work or socially anyone who has ever been through the process - not sure we can be talking about the same thing?

Just as you are not wrong for using it with those that do find a benefit from it

The are many people that post on here that would benefit - just look a the Number thread.

Glad we've cleared that up.

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

Even professionals can snap after the continual goading going along here!:D

Ah so you do know what you're up to after all?

feesarefare wrote: »

What a strange comment- You do realise that Dunstonh is the only regulated salesman on here dont you?

I could have sworn that when you told us what your job entailed you also said that where a product was necessary you would organise it through the ???? (please insert name - I've forgotten it) platform. There would be a cost for this.

feesarefare wrote: »

Nothing that could be attributed to the cashflow forecasting Im glad to see.

If the purpose of the cashflow forecasting is to work out what kind of return you need to achieve a specific aim and therefore to give appropriate advice, how is the inappropriate advice nothing to do with it>

feesarefare

jem16 wrote: »

If the purpose of the cashflow forecasting is to work out what kind of return you need to achieve a specific aim and therefore to give appropriate advice, how is the inappropriate advice nothing to do with it>

Well they clearly werent using it were they!

Did you not read the rest of my post?

Mind you if I posted 2+2=4 youd probably find some angle to have a dig.:(

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

Well they clearly werent using it were they!

I don't know - that's why I asked you a question.

Did you not read the rest of my post?

I did but obviously you feel I have missed something?

Mind you if I posted 2+2=4 youd probably find some angle to have a dig.:(

Ah so I'm supposed to have a sense of humour and laugh at your jokes but you're not.

Why so tetchy? I'm asking a genuine question to try to understand this cashflow forecasting.

feesarefare

jem16 wrote: »

Why so tetchy? I'm asking a genuine question to try to understand this cashflow forecasting.

If your genuine ask away-I would be happy to answer any questions you may have

jem16

feesarefare wrote: »

If your genuine ask away

Why wouldn't I be? You seem a bit paranoid tonight.

-I would be happy to answer any questions you may have

Main questions;

1. I have worked out that it is a lifestyle plan. What happens if I want something which would necessitate a return of around 40%. However I'm not into anything risky. It seems that the cases Dh points out were upheld as complaints, came about because investments that were too high in risk for an ineperienced investor were recommended.

Would you therefore say that what I want is unrealistic or attempt to achieve that goal knowing I would be unhappy if my investment dropped considerably?

2. How often is the plan updated? Does it cater for unexpected events such as unemployment or premature death?

dunstonh

Norfolk must have been a hot bed for lifetime cashflows for years as Truth only have 900 licences nationally and Ive yet to meet either at work or socially anyone who has ever been through the process - not sure we can be talking about the same thing?

Cashflow modelling is nothing new. Software was available long before truth. Certainly not with the same level of functionality you get today. Truth is also not the only supplier of cashflow modelling.

feesarefare

jem16 wrote: »

Why wouldn't I be? You seem a bit paranoid tonight.



Main questions;

1

. I have worked out that it is a lifestyle plan. What happens if I want something which would necessitate a return of around 40%. However I'm not into anything risky. It seems that the cases Dh points out were upheld as complaints, came about because investments that were too high in risk for an ineperienced investor were recommendedWould you therefore say that what I want is unrealistic or attempt to achieve that goal knowing I would be unhappy if my investment dropped considerably?

Yes you would be told your goal was unrealistic in that form . We could then look at if there we other ways of achieving that goal. Where it tends to be used most is risk management (the very opposite of dH'S case!!) We find many people have equity based portfolios chasing returns that they dont need to achieve.
So if someone is going to able to achieve their aims with say 3% growth we look to reduce the risk where possible- they can then enjoy themselves without stressing over the stockmarket . As we are charging for the advice and the planning we have no vested interest in funds under management.

People have been surprised by "you are already alright- keep doing what your doing"

2. How often is the plan updated?

Annually, although some of our clients request the odd ad hoc refresher visit if they have some kind of brainwave

Does it cater for unexpected events such as unemployment or premature death?

yes - there a 4 main scenarios and up to 8 plan variants although most users only use 3 max - Current / recommendations and recommendation with a few bonus add ons.

feesarefare

dunstonh wrote: »

. Truth is also not the only supplier of cashflow modelling.

Yes I know, I had a look at a few others but I think Truth is the best. Voyant is ok but overcomplicated. Which ones have you looked at and how do they compare to your findings with "Truth"