iii introducing quarterly £20 charge

nearlyretired2004

On phoning iii Yesterday (to check that they had received my transfer form from x-o) I was told that they 'had automatically put me on their waiver list' to exempt me from any charges for transferring away.

I asked whether this was the same list that I was told on Monday I couldn't be put on, unless my new provider indicated there would be a delay .......

Was told Yes, they had changed their policy due to the short timescales left before 30th June deadline - all callers who indicate they are transferring away are now automatically added to the waiver list.

SO if you're transferring away, call them and ask to be added to this list .....

dunstonh

That clarifies things for me. I'll be joining the others who are opting to move their funds elsewhere.

And as mentioned on this thread, make sure you pick a company that has already changed to unbundled charging or if you dont want platform features then dont use a platform. Otherwise you will be going through the same thing again when the alternative decides to go unbundled (which with the RDR and platform review now just around the corner, that will speed up for those that have not yet changed).

notbritishgas

dunstonh wrote: »

And as mentioned on this thread, make sure you pick a company that has already changed to unbundled charging or if you dont want platform features then dont use a platform. Otherwise you will be going through the same thing again when the alternative decides to go unbundled (which with the RDR and platform review now just around the corner, that will speed up for those that have not yet changed).

What do you think to the guarantee at the bottom of this link.

How does that fit in with unbundled charging and platform features, neither of which I understand.

www.x-o.co.uk/?gclid=CKKhyvrL5LACFVMetAodwVvbxg

sabretoothtigger

xo dont deal funds, i dont think they have any reason to change

investment trusts/etf/shares dont (usually) handle back fees to brokers or whoever? They are already pretty see through I think

koru

dunstonh wrote: »

And as mentioned on this thread, make sure you pick a company that has already changed to unbundled charging or if you dont want platform features then dont use a platform. Otherwise you will be going through the same thing again when the alternative decides to go unbundled (which with the RDR and platform review now just around the corner, that will speed up for those that have not yet changed).

I am showing my ignorance here, but what is the difference between a platform and an outfit like xo? Is it that a platform deals with custody of the investments and will deal with administration of things like dividends, whereas xo will just buy and sell shares on your behalf? So, with xo, you would need to look after share certificates yourself and receive dividends direct from the companies you are invested in? But a company like xo won't deal in unit trusts and OEICs, so if you want them you need to use a platform? Is the only alternative to a platform a broker, or is there some other alternative?

westy22

X-0 is an on-line stock broker - they hold your shares in a Nominee account (like most others) and receive dividends for you and credit them to your account. You can buy and sell shares, ITs and ETFs only. Each broker will allow access to different stock exchanges i.e. SVS only allow FTSE 350 shares whereas X-O offers a wider range including some overseas exchanges. These brokers should not be unduly affected by RDR and the subsequent Platform Review.

A platform offers a range of different investments including UTs, OEICS, tracker funds, shares, etc. The likes of BestInvest and H-L are platforms and they will be affected by the RDR and Platform Review.

koru

premierfella wrote: »

The Invesco example has come up before as a query on the forums. I'm not sure what the explanation is for ATS appearing not to rebate the platform fee that is included in the quoted 1.5% AMC figure (assuming that the 0.5% quoted rebate is the only rebate and that the platform fee isn't simply negated in another way e.g. via a stripped "RDR-friendly" version of the fund).

Supporting the theory that the platform fee may be being negated in some other way for some fund managers is the following. If ATS were choosing to selectively pocket platform fees from some fund managers (I can't see it explicitly stated on the retail investor site that they rebate 100% of trail and platform fees) then their site documents wouldn't seem to tally, as the 100% trail and platform fee rebate IS explicitly stated on the advisor site where the same 0.5% rebate is quoted in the list of funds (if they were fully rebating platform fees via advisors but pocketing selectively for retail investors, sure the number on the advisor site would be 0.75% rebate for Invesco Perpetual Income given 100% rebate of ALL commission?)
Advisor site documents referenced are:
http://www.alliancetrustsavings.co.uk/adviser/pdf/list-of-funds.pdf?
http://www.alliancetrustsavings.co.uk/adviser/pdf/invest-platform-guide.pdf relevant text on rebates is on page 8

I guess it isn't necessarily beyond the realms of possibility that, as the platform fee is not explicit (i.e. sticking with the Invesco example, still bundled in the AMC - even if ATS were using the "no trail" version), for some reason Invesco Perpetual selectively rebate part of the charge to some platforms and not others (although I can't see any reason why they would do that?).

Looks like it is far from restricted to Invesco. If my sample is any indication, ATS are rebating no platform commission on the majority of fund houses. I'm thinking of switching to iii, although it will take about a year before the extra rebate has paid me back for the dealing charges to switch from ATS.

koru

westy22 wrote: »

X-0 is an on-line stock broker - they hold your shares in a Nominee account (like most others) and receive dividends for you and credit them to your account. You can buy and sell shares, ITs and ETFs only. Each broker will allow access to different stock exchanges i.e. SVS only allow FTSE 350 shares whereas X-O offers a wider range including some overseas exchanges. These brokers should not be unduly affected by RDR and the subsequent Platform Review.

A platform offers a range of different investments including UTs, OEICS, tracker funds, shares, etc. The likes of BestInvest and H-L are platforms and they will be affected by the RDR and Platform Review.

So, the big difference is that a platform allows you to buy UTs and OEICs as well as shares/ETFs. Thanks.

dunstonh

So, the big difference is that a platform allows you to buy UTs and OEICs as well as shares/ETFs. Thanks.

it is one major feature of a platform (multiple investment universes). They also offer multiple tax wrappers (e.g. unwrapped, ISA, pension and bond). They will often have features and options that a basic service will not have (tax calculators, consolidated performance data and portfolio analysis, consolidated statements etc).

What happened was the cross subsidy from managed funds allowed platforms to offer loss leaders (such as passive funds/shares). So, platforms became a low cost option for passive investors. With that cross subsidy going and the platforms no longer going to get commissions, they need to charge explicitly. For some people this means a price increase. For others it means a reduction. Passive investors tend to be on the losing side.

For the fund investors on this thread, one indicator of whether the platform is unbundled is to look to see if they offer non commission paying versions of the funds. e.g. the Schroder class Z funds. These have no trail commission and no platform commission. They are typically 0.75% AMC compared to the retail class which is 1.50%. Unbundled platforms may well offer both (as it makes no difference if they are rebating it anyway). Bundled platforms will only offer the 1.5% retail.

Perelandra

koru wrote: »

Looks like it is far from restricted to Invesco. If my sample is any indication, ATS are rebating no platform commission on the majority of fund houses. I'm thinking of switching to iii, although it will take about a year before the extra rebate has paid me back for the dealing charges to switch from ATS.

Interesting... a few months ago when I was comparing the different options, I'm sure that the rebates that AT were giving were 0.25% higher than most of the rebates on their pdf now, so potentially the platform rebate has been removed...

I did print off their form then, but sadly I've probably shredded it by now, so I can't be sure if my recollection is correct or not!

Don't suppose anyone else can verify?