ISA or offshore?

jem16

JohnRo wrote: »

Thanks,

I've asked them to provide a clear and concise breakdown of the initial and trailing commission and management charges. I don't suppose there's any case to answer for misselling,

I would doubt there is any case for misseling as the commission and fees would have been disclosed to you. I assume it's too late to do it on fee basis instead?

Is the trust necessary? You have a £325,000 allowance and if you are married then you may be able to make use of the double allowance on the 2nd death. That would give you £650,000.

JohnRo

I do actually believe i've been missold, the offshore policy has been held for over 18 months. I can only assume they have played on my trust and as much as I hate to admit it, my ignorance. As it stands there is no advantage or reason for me having the offshore fund yet it was presented as the best option and it's now clear who that option was best for.

jem16

JohnRo wrote: »

IAs it stands there is no advantage or reason for me having the offshore fund yet it was presented as the best option and it's now clear who that option was best for.

You stated that you wanted a trust - that can be done onshore or offshore. However commission levels are the same so that's a kind of moot point.

Was the trust necessary to mitigate IHT?

JohnRo

The total value of my estate is well within the threshold level, this aspect wasn't discussed at the time.

The truth is I was largely ignorant of the facts surrounding investment, wrappers and inheritance taxation and so took their advice at face value believing them to be trustworthy. The advice was that an off shore wrapper was the most efficient place to have my money with a view to maximising it's potential returns, preserving the funds and passing those on unmolested should I get hit by a bus.

jem16

JohnRo wrote: »

The total value of my estate is well within the threshold level, this aspect wasn't discussed at the time.

Are you a higher rate taxpayer or not?

The advice was that an off shore wrapper was the most efficient place to have my money with a view to maximising it's potential returns, preserving the funds and passing those on unmolested should I get hit by a bus.

All of which can be done without the use of the Investment Bond tax wrapper.

Did your ISA allowance get utilised first?

JohnRo

jem16 wrote: »

Are you a higher rate taxpayer or not?

Nope

jem16 wrote: »

All of which can be done without the use of the Investment Bond tax wrapper.

Did your ISA allowance get utilised first?

Nope, I had a cashISA and stocksISA which still exist seperately to the offshore fund being discussed.

The more I've read these last weeks and the more I look at it the sicker and more annoyed with myself I feel. As said up thread it's not a complete disaster but I feel like a complete idiot for allowing them, through my trust and ignorance, to do this to me. I genuinely feel like i've been mugged by them looking back at everything.

c'est la vie

jem16

JohnRo wrote: »

Nope, I had a cashISA and stocksISA which still exist seperately to the offshore fund being discussed.

So at the time of taking out the offshore bond, had you used up all of your ISA allowance in that cash ISA and S&S ISA?

JohnRo

Nope, with hindsight the errors are beating me over the head but at the time I just went with the flow and assumed they were directing me towards a financial structure that would give the investment and me the very best outcome. It never entered my head they were snake oil salesmen.

The ISA funds were transferred but not topped up that year or since, the cashISA rates were truly dreadful anyway so that didn't concern me and the stocks and shares ISA didn't register as needing to be since I was moving the money into a tax free vehicle anyway.

The bottom line is I just didn't and probably still don't have enough knowledge to ask the right questions of the IFA or (at that time) see that I was being taken advantage of. That's the whole point of using an IFA in the first place i'd have thought but then again I should have shopped around, not sure whether that excuses this or not though.

I'm going to phone the financial ombudsmen on monday and see whether they have any advice about what has happened and whether there is a claim for misselling.

dunstonh

I'm going to phone the financial ombudsmen on monday and see whether they have any advice about what has happened and whether there is a claim for misselling.

You cant go direct to the FOS. You have to go through the complaints process first. If you ring the FOS, the staff that answer the phones are not qualified to make any on the spot decisions like that. They just filter out the obvious things you cannot complain about. So, you would just get the scripted "we would like to take a look at that response". It may even sound encouraging that you may have a valid complaint but it doesnt mean a thing.

The offshore tax wrapper can be beneficial over the long term. Especially if you have assets which are heavier in income/interest distributions. I havent seen anything you have posted to suggest it is the wrong advice. However, nothing to suggest it is right either. I can certainly see greed in respect of commission taken but the commission would be the normal retail price. e.g. if you bought direct from Canada Life or a tied agent sourced product then that is the price you pay. Its just that fee based IFAs would have been cheaper. So, the remuneration isnt actually a mis-sale issue.

I suggest you take a look at the suitability report that you were issued on the initial advice. That will have the reasons why along with why potential other alternatives were not suitable along with a range of risk warnings. That is the key document in any complaint but it is also the key document in reminding you why something is recommended.

The bottom line is I just didn't and probably still don't have enough knowledge to ask the right questions of the IFA or (at that time) see that I was being taken advantage of. That's the whole point of using an IFA in the first place i'd have thought but then again I should have shopped around, not sure whether that excuses this or not though.

The whole point of using an IFA is to get it done right. In the minority of cases when its not done right then you get the consumer protection that puts it right.

JohnRo

I can't honestly recall ever having a suitability report presented to me, I don't have the paperwork with me right now but I have looked through it several times recently and that is one document I haven't noticed. My main concern, after the irritation at being so gullible, is for the viability of any complaint procedure if appropriate, due to the elapsed time since the policy was sold to me.