Help with my ii confusion please

premierfella

Some selected answers:

Selftrade - the transfer out fee is in that link, but in the notes:
If you wish to transfer out the underlying ISA assets, then a charge of £20 per holding will also apply.
There is no other closure fee and transfers out in cash are free.

Their regular investment facility also isn't all shares, but FTSE350 plus selected ETFs, ETCs and investment trusts (in addition to the funds in their funds list)

Iweb - ignore the repair ISA charge - that isn't really relevant.

TDDirect - you've already said the HSBC fund you hold isn't in SIPPdeals funds list. That almost certainly means that it is the cheap All Share tracker with AMC of 0.25% (thus free). Personally I can't see that fee structure for funds being maintainable long-term, but that is pure speculation on my part.

In your position I would probably be thinking very carefully about whether it would be worth going the "just shares", "just funds" or splitting the two somehow. Will you continue to invest in funds in the future alongside your share purchases?

Or (depending on the size of the funds holding) could you perhaps invest in the funds outside an ISA and keep the share purchases inside an ISA? Splitting the two into separate accounts could make the fund(s) more "portable" if fees change (as you can just sell to cash and transfer free elsewhere) whilst just shares in a share ISA account might be less prone to annual fees in the future.

dunstonh

GRRRR the sippdeal funds list that you can invest in for 'nil' charges doesn't include a FTSE tracker and the AMC's are all above 1% (I am a very novice/simple investor).

Have you read the FSA announcement today on platforms and their explicit comment about SIPP providers making out they have nil charge (or low charge) but hiding the fees within undisclosed commissions?

The FSA almost certainly is pre-empting that it is going to include SIPPs in the platform review.

fimonkey

dunstonh wrote: »

Have you read the FSA announcement today on platforms and their explicit comment about SIPP providers making out they have nil charge (or low charge) but hiding the fees within undisclosed commissions?

The FSA almost certainly is pre-empting that it is going to include SIPPs in the platform review.

No I haven't read it - and unfortunately have NO IDEA what you are talking about (I still can't speak 'finance'). What does it mean in laymens terms please, and specifically what does it mean for me? - am I wasting my time with this research and the answer is to just sell everything instead?

Also when you say SIPP providers, does that mean ISA S&S providers too? (I always thought sippdeal was only for pensions and today I learnt otherwise, is SIPP a general investing term?) - I'm not interested in SIPPs as in a pension (have one of those through my employer), I am only interested in S&S and funds at the moment.

fimonkey

premierfella wrote: »

TDDirect - you've already said the HSBC fund you hold isn't in SIPPdeals funds list. That almost certainly means that it is the cheap All Share tracker with AMC of 0.25% (thus free). Personally I can't see that fee structure for funds being maintainable long-term, but that is pure speculation on my part

. Thank you SO much, have updated my spreadsheet where I am comparing the platforms...

premierfella wrote: »

In your position I would probably be thinking very carefully about whether it would be worth going the "just shares", "just funds" or splitting the two somehow. Will you continue to invest in funds in the future alongside your share purchases?

I am going both 'shares' and 'funds'. The reason is that I want the 'just funds' to provide long term growth and beat the interest rates I can get in my cash ISA. The 'just shares' is so I can learn about individual companies. I suppose I am hedging my bets, but in the future I would like to be more actively managing my portfolio (hence my 'dabble' with shares with money I can currently afford to loose).

premierfella wrote: »

Or (depending on the size of the funds holding) could you perhaps invest in the funds outside an ISA and keep the share purchases inside an ISA? Splitting the two into separate accounts could make the fund(s) more "portable" if fees change (as you can just sell to cash and transfer free elsewhere) whilst just shares in a share ISA account might be less prone to annual fees in the future.

That's how I originally started, with H&L for my funds ISA then I wanted to start buying shares but was too expensive with H&L so I looked to ii and their portfolio builder and held the shares outside an ISA (hence my two accounts with ii now, one of which is the old trading account). Then when H&L introduced charges for holding low TER funds I closed my H&L account and opened an ISA with ii instead, then started building up again with shares and also the HSBC tracker when I found out they held that too. I got stung with H&L charges of about £90 when I did this (GRRR) but as its all al learning experience I put it down to that.

dunstonh

fimonkey wrote: »

No I haven't read it - and unfortunately have NO IDEA what you are talking about (I still can't speak 'finance'). What does it mean in laymens terms please, and specifically what does it mean for me? - am I wasting my time with this research and the answer is to just sell everything instead?

Also when you say SIPP providers, does that mean ISA S&S providers too? (I always thought sippdeal was only for pensions and today I learnt otherwise, is SIPP a general investing term?) - I'm not interested in SIPPs as in a pension (have one of those through my employer), I am only interested in S&S and funds at the moment.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4039549

There is the thread on the formal announcement. It's been known for a while but was under consultation which could have allowed change. However, not many expected change.

This is the reason why platforms are changing their charging structures. At the moment, you are leaving III because they have changed their charges to comply with these rules and are considering some platforms that have not yet changed their charges to comply with this rules but will need to do so.

So, yes, it does affect you.

fimonkey

Typical that! .. Dunstoh are you able to tell me which of the 6 I am considering have already chaged their rules then? Given TD have got the 'new charges from 1st July' sheet am I right in presuming they HAVE already changed?

Will go and read the thread now - but why? WHy have they got to change, what was wrong with the old system? And if it relates to SIPPS then why include all charges? GRRRRRRR - impossible to learn when thre goal posts move around so much.

premierfella

So, currently iii trading and ISA accounts, but the only fund held is one HSBC tracker (or does the iii ISA contain other funds transferred from HL?)

If the only fund is HSBC, in your position I would:
- sell the fund now to leave just cash and shares at iii;
- transfer both iii share accounts to another broker offering £1.50 regular investments for future share purchases;
- open a separate account elsewhere for future fund purchases (I hold a HSBC fund directly with HSBC via their Global Investment Centre).

Any "free" funds platform that you transfer to is, as dunstonh is highlighting, likely to change their charges for funds in some way within the next 18 months. So keeping your funds and shares mixed together is going to cause you another headache in the coming months (for those with larger holdings the fees become less important and the positives of keeping everything in one place may make one platform for everything worthwhile, but clearly charges are important with your portfolio size - hence why I suggest you may be better off keeping funds and shares apart).

The above is just an opinion, and to be honest its validity depends how large your portfolio is, how much of the ISA limit you use each year and how much you value having the ability to trade stocks and funds in the same accounts.

pqrdef

dunstonh wrote: »

Have you read the FSA announcement today on platforms and their explicit comment about SIPP providers making out they have nil charge (or low charge) but hiding the fees within undisclosed commissions?

Oh for crying out loud.

Breaking news: Tesco Clubcard points to be banned because hey, you pay for them in the price of the shopping. Shock horror, who knew.

Does anybody think "free" means the company directors pay for it out of their own pockets?

grey_gym_sock

if the current system is working, why are so many ppl, who aren't taking financial advice, still paying 0.5% trail commssion on their investments (when this commission was supposed to pay for financial advice)? or only getting (e.g.) half of it refunded?

why are even more ppl paying for a platform (via a hidden platform commission), even though many of them just wanted the cheapest way to buy the fund, and wouldn't have used a platform if were cheaper not to?

the current system works OK for ppl who've spotted some ways to take advantage of it.

dunstonh

if the current system is working, why are so many ppl, who aren't taking financial advice, still paying 0.5% trail commssion on their investments (when this commission was supposed to pay for financial advice)? or only getting (e.g.) half of it refunded

exactly. However, its not just the trail but the platform commission and marketing payments.

How many times has a fund appeared in a so called "recommended" list of funds without any obvious justification for doing so? There could be a reason but what if that fund house has paid them £xxx,000 to market their funds?

the current system works OK for ppl who've spotted some ways to take advantage of it.

The current system works as it takes a cross subsidy from managed funds and larger investors to pay for passives/trackers and smaller investors. One group gains, another loses. The changes reduce the cross subsidy and make it fairer or at least make it appear to be fairer.