AVIVA's MVR ate my profit

darkpool

opinions4u wrote: »

To be honest darkpool, you are beginning to sound like a complete idiot.

That is absolutely not what jem said.

so what has the failed court case regarding bank charges got to do with it then? it has been yourself and jem banging away about it, i thought you were trying to argue a case. Perhaps you were just trying to share some random facts on the thread?

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

so what has the failed court case regarding bank charges got to do with it then?

God you're hard work!

You said;

darkpool wrote: »

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

I pointed out that the unfair bank charges campaign failed despite loads on here, including Martin himself, thinking they were.

it has been yourself and jem banging away about it, i thought you were trying to argue a case.

I'm not trying to argue any case - simply pointing out where your reasoning is flawed.

darkpool

jem16 wrote: »

God you're hard work!

You said;



I pointed out that the unfair bank charges campaign failed despite loads on here, including Martin himself, thinking they were.



I'm not trying to argue any case - simply pointing out where your reasoning is flawed.

but Martin isn't a judge. in our court system it's juries/ sheriffs/ judges etc that decide the outcome. i do stand by the fact that unreasonable contracts are set aside.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

but Martin isn't a judge.

Correct. However a lot think he's God and that everything he says will come to pass.

in our court system it's juries/ sheriffs/ judges etc that decide the outcome.

Yes it was the Supreme Court that decided.

i do stand by the fact that unreasonable contracts are set aside.

Note the highlighted word.

There is nothing to suggest that an MVR is unreasonable. In fact it is designed to make a with-profits fund fair and reasonable for all its investors.

darkpool

jem16 wrote: »

Correct. However a lot think he's God and that everything he says will come to pass.



Yes it was the Supreme Court that decided.



Note the highlighted word.

There is nothing to suggest that an MVR is unreasonable. In fact it is designed to make a with-profits fund fair and reasonable for all its investors.

i certainly don't think he's god.

MVR is one of those things that might be legal, but isn't very ethical. it is a downside to these collective investments.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

MVR is one of those things that might be legal, but isn't very ethical.

Only if it was applied without ever being mentioned at point of sale.

it is a downside to these collective investments.

Yes it is which brings us back to where we started. Read the T&Cs - if it's not for you, don't use it.

darkpool

let's all be grown ups here. you really think IFAs emphasise how guaranteed bonuses can be reduced?

i type of think we'll all have to agree to disagree on this one.

but i agree that people should read the t and cs.

Derivative

This thread in a nutshell:

Man buys financial instrument without reading T&Cs.
Performance is not as expected.
Man, instead of learning from his mistake, blames others.

Sad, really.

jem16

darkpool wrote: »

let's all be grown ups here. you really think IFAs emphasise how guaranteed bonuses can be reduced?

Guaranteed bonuses aren't being reduced though.

However beside that point, IFAs are required to write a Suitability Report detailing their reasons why. They also provide a KFD and an illustration from the provider. Then you get the policy document from the provider which comes with a cancellation period.

I'm not sure what else they can do.

i type of think we'll all have to agree to disagree on this one.

True.

but i agree that people should read the t and cs.

It is important.

ellenGB

EdgEy wrote: »

This thread in a nutshell:

Man buys financial instrument without reading T&Cs.
Performance is not as expected.
Man, instead of learning from his mistake, blames others.

Sad, really.

Not sad. This thread wasn't about it at all. Complete misrepresentation. Now that's sad.