AVIVA's MVR ate my profit

dunstonh

If you dont read the details of a unit linked fund, including a FTSE tracker, then how do you know how it is going to work? You wouldnt know about Supply and demand factors on an ETF tracker can cause a premium or discount to its Net Asset Value. Or that some ETFs hold dividends in cash, and only pay them out to investors on a periodic basis. However some ETFs have the ability to re-invest dividends daily. A lag in dividend re-investment may cause small underperformance in rising markets.

if you dont read about them then you dont know.

Aviva publish some very good fund details on their WP fund versions. Its 11 sides of A4 with normal size print and a few pictures. It should take no more than a few minutes to read. Look at:

http://www.international-aviva.com/AllLiterature/document,349907,en.pdf

darkpool

talexuser wrote: »

I can just see the picture:
Judge "Is this your signature under these terms and conditions?" Plaintiff: "Yes, your Honour."
Judge: "And exactly what is your complaint against this contract?"
"Err... I didn't read it...."
:rotfl:

ehhhhhmmmm but the judge will set the contract aside if the terms are unreasonable. i type of thought that was common knowledge.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

i did see your smiley face, i'm just confused why t and cs are only important when you have to sign a contract.

I shall explain. It is nothing to do with whether or not something has to be signed. It is all to do with how important something is. I don't quite view a bus ride, which I very rarely take, as having the same importance as a financial commitment.

so you only read the t and cs after the contract has gone wrong?

I never said that.

originally i thought your read the t and cs before the start of the contract

Yes I do read them at the start. How else would I know, when something goes wrong, that I can successfully complain? I also know what I am committing myself to and whether or not I wish to do so.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

ehhhhhmmmm but the judge will set the contract aside if the terms are unreasonable. i type of thought that was common knowledge.

Yes just like that highly publicised case against unfair bank charges succeeded. (or not)

darkpool

jem16 wrote: »

People should though. Otherwise how can you decide if something is right for you? If you take out a contract without doing so, you have only yourself ot blame - ignorance is no defence in the law.

ahhh ok, so you only read important contracts. your post above sugested you read every single contract you have ever entered into - you seem to suggest you were stupid not to read every single contract entered into

darkpool

jem16 wrote: »

Yes just like that highly publicised case against unfair bank charges succeeded. (or not)

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

opinions4u

darkpool wrote: »

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

I think you missed the point completely!

(The more recently intoduced The UnfairTerms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 is probably more relevant).

darkpool

opinions4u wrote: »

I think you missed the point completely!

i possibly did, what was the point in your opinion?

contracts can be set aside.......

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

ahhh ok, so you only read important contracts.

Yes the ones which could cause me grief if I didn't.

I must admit to not reading the T&Cs of the packet of crisps I bought this morning.

magpiecottage

EllenGB still has not provided a copy of the Key Features that would have been provided at outset and, unless and until she does, I remain of the view that Aviva will have provided the required information in a way that most people would consider clear, fair and not misleading.

As far as Darkpool is concerned, getting back only a couple of percent more than you put in is unfortunate but that does not make it unfair.

What would be unfair would be if, say, you owned 10 per cent of the overall value of the fund but were allowed to take 12 per cent out of it unless it was in clearly defined circumstances. If the fund had nine other investors each owning 10 per cent, they would rightly be unhappy with Aviva.

Therefore, your argument that an MVR breaches regulations intended to achieve fair treatment is a nonsense.