Drop in well paid using IFA's

jem16

2010 wrote: »

It's a pity you didn't afford me the same courtesy though.

I have and I am.

So it's kinda hard for me to keep up is not insulting in your view? That says it all really.

Are you saying that Aviva (CGNU) only charged your for the first five years and then there have been no charges from years 5 to 10?

Exactly what I`m saying

Then you have just confirmed that you know nothing about the product.

Plus whatever the FA`s take is every year for selling the policy in the first place.

I assumed that out of the 5 years management charges that the EOB was given something like .5% as ongoing commission. If not then he only received the original X %, a half of which he rebated to me.

So you don't actually know what you paid the broker?

If I said FA it was done probably for quickness rather than typing the full EOB and then abbreviating it.

I'm sure broker would have done the same job.

It seems a bit strange to mention IFAs and FAs if you haven't used one.

As posted before I haven`t used an IFA or FA directly, what CGNU paid out as far as I`m aware was the EOB percentage

Let me check your deifinition of a broker? I assume you mean a discount broker such as Hargreaves Lansdown or Cavendish Online?

No but it goes a long way to explaining why you come out with accusations that all IFAs are ripping everybody off.

You get rotten apples in every barrel, nowhere did I say all.

Well that's progress. You are now admittting that there are IFAs that don't rip you off.

My bond was cashed in Aug 2010 and the paid unit rate was 201.8p
Yesterdays rate for the same WP Portfolio fund was 207.2p

Here`s the link and it`s the 2nd from the bottom.

http://www.fundworksinvestments.com/...fe&filter=NCG1

So to confirm - you had an Aviva (formerly CGNU Portfolio Investment Bond which was invested in a With-Profits Fund?

fairleads

And after reading this thread the numbers will no doubt keep on dropping. Its ethic and empathy that make good advisors, not qualifications and pass rates.

atush

With Profits had been around for generations and been very successful. The move to unit linked had started and has moved on year by year as the cost of operating a WP fund and the liability that goes with it became impossible for many insurers to meet. I would say that IFAs were more unit linked than WP 10 years ago.

WP Bonds paid no more commission than unit linked. - so that is rubbish.

I remember after I moved to the UK in 1990 in the early 90's starting researching this stuff. I was looking to save and invest and wanted to know how to do it. And the more I did, the more I decided that I didn't want WPs, and I wasn't a huge fan if Unit trusts either due to the charges (although this was the beginning of discount broking) And i decided I preferred investment trusts so started using them for my collective investments as they were far cheaper to run that UTs. OH had a WP pension then (no choice it was what his company had arranged). But I ahd a broker acct with Charles Scwab where I gambled the children's child benefit, after I had finshied carpet bagging.

When Oeics came along, and more discount broking some of them had as low a charge as some ITs, and then trackers came online and they were cheaper still.

Lots more choice than there was in the olden days lol. But I still like ITs ;-)

BobQ

2010 wrote: »

FA or IFA, how do you know it`s "good advice".
All they can tell you is how an investment has performed in the PAST.
You`ll only know how good the advice was after you`ve paid and continued to pay through the nose a few years later.

Anyone can go online and check past performance but I`ve never seen a site that gave future ones only projected.
If this investment grows at x,y or z amount, you get this, that and the other back.
I`ve never seen a projected performance where it gives a minus one, which is very often the case.
.

I'm quite sceptical about IFAs too but this is unfair. Whether you are an IFA or a knowledgeable private investor all you can do is assess past performance and project the future. Nobody can say what S&S investments will do in the future. All an IFA can do is give an informed opinion about future performance which may or may not be accurate.

What would be the point of an IFA recommending an investment they think will fall? Anymore than you investinging in something you expected to lose money!

The problem IFAs face is that markets have been so volatile in recent years that many of those who trusted their advice in the past, now think they less likely to be able to accurately pick the best products.

2010

jem16 wrote: »

So to confirm - you had an Aviva (formerly CGNU Portfolio Investment Bond which was invested in a With-Profits Fund?

I`ve given you the link to the WP bond with the sell price I got and the lastest price.
What you want to believe is now down to you.(the proceeds are safely tucked away)

2010

Anyone who goes to an IFA can expect to be relieved of a large part of their investment whether the "advice" they receive is good, bad or indifferent.

Where any product is commission driven it`s widely open to abuse and often is.

It`s common sense that if an IFA has two products to sell and one of them pays a larger amount of commission/fees, then that`s the one to push.

The IFA has no idea how any product will perform in the future only how it has in the past.

That basically sums up IFA.

2010

This is probably a good time to remind some people that they can escape the WP Bond trap:

Today more than 10m people have £400bn invested in with-profits policies - equivalent to the entire UK building society market.
But the vast majority of investors have had to endure very poor investment performance and to add insult to injury thousands of savers are trapped by an exit penalty, dubbed a market value reduction (MVR), which can be introduced at will, at anytime and at any level.


The study found that historic sales of with-profit bonds peaked to a total of 1.3m policies between 2000 and 2002, representing £38.4bn of investment.
Many of these bonds include a 10-year anniversary MVR-free spot guarantee which enables investors to withdraw their money on the tenth anniversary of the bond's start date without incurring the usual penalty which applies if a policyholder chooses to cash a policy in early.


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-1687847/Can-you-escape-the-with-profits-trap.html#ixzz1miYXLQ5s

opinions4u

2010 wrote: »

It`s common sense that if an IFA has two products to sell and one of them pays a larger amount of commission/fees, then that`s the one to push.

In most cases, the IFA will have access to dozens of products. Not just two.

In nearly all cases they won't sell the one with the highest commission. Invariably it will be towards the other end of the commission scale.

Where they do sell the one with the highest commission, they will be required to clearly document the reasons for that selection and why it is considered more appropriate than cheaper alternatives.

By the way, you seem to have completely glossed over the fee charging alternative here. Yet a few pages back you were banging on about that being excessive too (without taking in to account the costs of running a business).

dunstonh

2010, you have lost all credibility. You just look like a troll now.

By all means, keep it up and everyone can keep laughing at you.

2010

Thank you,Opinions4u, but if you look closely it says commission/fees