Drop in well paid using IFA's

2010

Aegis wrote: »

If you're referring to rebalancing rather than churning,

A rose by any other name.

The vast majority of posters feel that at the very most IFA are getting money for nothing with no come back and at the very least most are "at it" purely for the fat fees/commission.

I get pestered now again by calls from people who want to "manage my wealth".
Wealth Management Consultants.

These vultures seem to think I can`t manage the very thing that I have created.
They think I should let them manage my wealth and probably make me poorer.
Needless to say, it`s a very short phone call.

dunstonh

I have seen people make horrendous decisions with their own money.

Same here. Very often, I take on clients who tried DIY but made a right mess of it (typically investing above risk profile and getting carried away)

And I have never been contacted by a past IFA trying to churn.

I periodically contact clients to move contracts. I dont charge when we do as that is part of the servicing arrangement. Contracts change frequently and not telling someone that something better has arrived is worse than leaving them on an obsolete product.

In respect of some of the posts on this thread, some are quite nasty and vindictive and quite wrong as well. It would be nice to see those running down IFAs to say what their occupation is so we can all criticise them.

2010

dunstonh wrote: »

In respect of some of the posts on this thread, some are quite nasty and vindictive and quite wrong as well. It would be nice to see those running down IFAs to say what their occupation is so we can all criticise them.

Maybe they have proper jobs.

The comments are not nasty or vindictive merely facts and experiences.

Aegis

2010 wrote: »

A rose by any other name.

What???

So if you had two investments that you wanted balanced at 50% each, and one of them grew to 75% value, then switching back to the balance in line with the risk profile is "churning"?

That's ridiculous, you're effectively creating a situation where the IFA can't win. If they do what they're supposed to do and rebalance to maintain the correct risk profile, they're guilty of churning in your eyes. If they don't make such switches, then they're guilty of doing nothing and taking a fee for it.

Come on, at least make the situation winnable!

The vast majority of posters feel that at the very most IFA are getting money for nothing with no come back and at the very least most are "at it" purely for the fat fees/commission.

No they don't, at most there are 5 or 6 of you who think like that. The vast majority don't really have an opinion either way, but there are quite a number of people posting here who use IFAs and are happy with the service.

I get pestered now again by calls from people who want to "manage my wealth".
Wealth Management Consultants.

These vultures seem to think I can`t manage the very thing that I have created.
They think I should let them manage my wealth and probably make me poorer.
Needless to say, it`s a very short phone call.

That's fine. Cold callers generally deserve to get nowhere. However, just because you can manage your own portfolio effectively doesn't mean that everyone else can, and some are more than happy to retain the services of an IFA.

ILW

Why will IFAs not take payment on results? I would be happy to pay a percentage of increase in value above market average over a five year period say, but it appears there is not a single IFA that will put their money where their mouth is. They do seem to expect the client to take all the risks whilst taking the fees no matter how good or bad the advice was.

Aegis

ILW wrote: »

Why will IFAs not take payment on results? I would be happy to pay a percentage of increase in value above market average over a five year period say, but it appears there is not a single IFA that will put their money where their mouth is. They do seem to expect the client to take all the risks whilst taking the fees no matter how good or bad the advice was.

Surely that means you wouldn't pay a fee for 5 years. How many business do you know that would ever offer 5 years of work before taking any payments?

While there might be IFAs with a large enough cash balance that they could offer performance based fees, on outperformance of a certain benchmark, (i) they would need to charge a huge amount of the over-performance to take account of the extra risk they run on the fees and (ii) they would be incentivised to take excessive risk with your portfolio to try to outperform your selected benchmark.

In addition, IFAs don't just do investments, so this would be a poor remuneration model for other aspects of their service which are often bundled in and reviewed as part of the ongoing investment fees.

In short, it's not a very good business model for the IFA or for the consumer.

darkpool

dunstonh wrote: »

In respect of some of the posts on this thread, some are quite nasty and vindictive and quite wrong as well.

? really? which ones do you consider nasty and vindictive?

i must have missed those ones.

atush

2010 wrote: »

Maybe they have proper jobs.

The comments are not nasty or vindictive merely facts and experiences.

I have seen accusations and postualtions but very little in the way of facts.

And most 'facts' presented tend to confuse IFAs with FAs from banks and insurance companies. Of those of my acquaintance who have had bad FA experiences they have always been from tied agents, not independants.

2010

Yes we know that FA can only sell (rip you off) with their own companies products, whereas an IFA can do the same with everybody`s products.

FACTS, FACTS, FACTS

Consumers are being "churned" into different pension products, often with higher charges or risks, to generate commission for their financial advisers, according to Consumer Focus.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/jul/20/pensions-retirement-planning

2010

FACTS, FACTS, FACTS;

Don't listen to dodgy financial advisers

Some advisers may not have your best interests at heart when they advise you to check your investments at least once a year.

I’m always suspicious when I read someone saying: “You must check your investments at least once a year.”
I get even more suspicious if I see that the person giving the advice is a financial adviser.
I’m suspicious because I reckon some advisers may push for annual investment reviews for the wrong reason. I fear they want to book up annual appointments with their clients so they can flog them a new batch of financial products. Especially investment products.

http://www.lovemoney.com/news/the-economy-politics-and-your-job/the-economy/11513/dont-listen-to-dodgy-financial-advisers

The first comment is worth reading also.