Drop in well paid using IFA's

2010

jem16 wrote: »

I have shown that the Portfolio Bond has a higher annual management charge from Years 1 to 5 which then drops to the normal annual management charge from Year 5.

Now until you show us all that you have a special financial product with no annual management charges, then I doubt you will have any credibility on this board. (if you ever had in the first place)

More waffle and twisting.
My bond had NO management charges after year 5.
PROVE it did.
Someone as clever and knowitall as you should be able to do it.

I`ve got the flannel ready. :rotfl:

Lokolo

2010 wrote: »

More waffle and twisting.
My bond had NO management charges after year 5.
PROVE it did.
Someone as clever and knowitall as you should be able to do it.

I`ve got the flannel ready. :rotfl:

So Jem is saying you did have AMC after 5 years and has given you proof.

You say there hasn't been yet cannot give proof.

And yet you STILL think you are right?

I am absolutely confused as to how you think you are correct when you don't even have any evidence to show?

2010

Lokolo wrote: »

So Jem is saying you did have AMC after 5 years and has given you proof.

I am absolutely confused as to how you think you are correct when you don't even have any evidence to show?

How could he possibly know the T&C of my bond, but he says he does.
He says he knows that I did pay AMC after year 5, don`t you think that`s a bit arrogant.

I said there were no AMC after the 5th year, why do I need evidence, I know what my own bond`s T&C were.

It`s up to him to prove he is correct.
Don`t worry, he won`t rest until he does find the actual T&C.

Thats why I`ve got the flannel ready. :rotfl:

Lokolo

2010 wrote: »

How could he possibly know the T&C of my bond, but he says he does.
He says he knows that I did pay AMC after year 5, don`t you think that`s a bit arrogant.

I said there were no AMC after the 5th year, why do I need evidence, I know what my own bond`s T&C were.

It`s up to him to prove he is correct.
Don`t worry, he won`t rest until he does find the actual T&C.

Thats why I`ve got the flannel ready. :rotfl:

You are a complete idiot then.

You're saying she's got it wrong yet it's just words. The one who shouts the loudest doesn't mean they're right, the one who can produce the facts does. You cannot produce the facts. Jem has produced some. You say you can disprove her, yet you aren't. So you are wrong. Jem is right.

It's not arrogant, it makes you an idiot to keep saying "Jem you are wrong". You are just making yourself look like a complete fool. Keep it up, it makes everyone else look like a genius.

dunstonh

Jem is correct. 2010 is wrong (just like he is with most things). The product terms for that era version of the bond would not give a fund without an AMC.

atush

2010 wrote: »

The is a typical retort from an IFA, when something`s posted you don`t like it`s an unreliable source, etc., or when all else fails you resort to ridicule, insults or you`re a "troll".

Pretty pathetic for a so called "professional". :rotfl:

and you are pretty pathetic for a wannabe troll as you never keep your story straight, and take discredited newspaper reports as gospel.

I am beginning to think you may actually be deranged.:eek:

But now I realise you are just intellectually challenged.

atush

2010 wrote: »

More waffle, you can`t prove it.

You`re the one with time on your hands to go trawling back through the years.(as you`ve already done)
I`m sure you`ll eventually find it, so I`ll wait with bated breath for you to put it on here.

I`ll get the flannel ready. :rotfl::rotfl:

If you spent as much time researching your investments, as you do posting here in this thread:

1- slagging off IFAs which you apprently know nothing abt

2- actually investing in well researched products

You might actully be a sucessful amateur investor rather than a bitter, poisoned troll.:rotfl:

angryofacaciavenue

I know of a lady adviser who charges £1,000 just to step through your door before she gives advice !!! Thats's extra. Where does this make sense for someone investing £10,000 in an ISA each year ? If this is what fees will be then commission looks ok as long as the adviser provides the follow up and service they promise. You can 't get hold of your bank adviser at any time of the day or night and they won't usually come and see you at home for a small investment.

dunstonh

I know of a lady adviser who charges £1,000 just to step through your door before she gives advice !!! Thats's extra. Where does this make sense for someone investing £10,000 in an ISA each year ?

That clearly isnt her target market. I know a regional accountant firm that charges £2500 just to get through the factfind process. Again, they focus on people where larger amounts are involved.

However, £10k a year every year (e.g. bed&ISA) is quite normal for even the very wealthy.

If this is what fees will be then commission looks ok as long as the adviser provides the follow up and service they promise.

Commission is cheaper for small cases.

You can 't get hold of your bank adviser at any time of the day or night and they won't usually come and see you at home for a small investment.

Although you wouldnt want a bank adviser. Although smaller cases do often go that way.

Rollinghome

angryofacaciavenue wrote: »

I know of a lady adviser who charges £1,000 just to step through your door before she gives advice !!! Thats's extra. Where does this make sense for someone investing £10,000 in an ISA each year ? If this is what fees will be then commission looks ok as long as the adviser provides the follow up and service they promise. You can 't get hold of your bank adviser at any time of the day or night and they won't usually come and see you at home for a small investment.

I know an IFA who charges a minimum of £10,000 per annum and won't take clients with less than £1 million. So what? What does it matter if you pay as a fee or as commission if the amount is the same?

What is important is that an adviser shouldn't push clients towards investments that pay commission while avoiding those such as investment trusts just because they don't.

I suggest you look at the recent thread by someone who was persuaded by their IFA to invest in the now defunct commission paying Arch Cru funds.