Endowment maturity value??

dunstonh

COLOURBOUNCE wrote: »

Mmmm.. I bought my Endowment through an independant.

IFAs didnt exist prior to 1988. So, yours must have been a short term endowment. Of course, independent in 2012 is a long way from independent of 20 years ago. The due diligence and research that has to be in place today is far greater than rules of that era which required as little as picking the best of three providers from data that was published in a monthly pink paper.

However, having a crystal ball is not a requirement of the role.

COLOURBOUNCE

Blind really were leading the blind.

dunstonh

I never understand why people prefer to remain ignorant rather than learn and understand the issues and why things happened as they did. I guess it is easier to have the knowledge built up on Daily Mail headlines than facts.

zagfles

opinions4u wrote: »

That's a ridiculous statement. Perhaps suggesting that you don't actually understand what an IFA does.

it depends on the policy type. A unit linked policy is crystal clear. A with profits policy is a little more complex. But, unless my knowledge is out of date, a mutual company can remove no more than expenses from the fund.

Remembering that "expenses" will include commission paid to the advisor/broker/bank who sold you the endowment.

A plc an remove no more than 10% of the profits from the fund. Everything else is the policyholders' money and is ring-fenced accordingly.

Actuaries and accountants on behalf of the companies. Complying with FSA regulations along the way.

Endowment funds have not covered themselves in glory. A few reasons:

- lower interest rates than when the original projections were calculated.
- lower long term investment returns compared to previous performance.
- a move to "safer" investments effectively meaning shares were sold when the market was low.

Plus massive commission paid to endowment sales staff or their organisation.

I saw a couple of "mortgage brokers" in the 90's. They promised freebies if I took out a mortgage through them, such as paying the solicitor's fees for my house purchase.

But when I went to see them and told them I wanted a repayment or interest only mortgage, no endowment, they suddenly all lost interest in doing business with me. One of them freely admitted they make all their money from commission on selling endowments and insurances, and virtually nothing on brokering mortgages. I suggested they stop calling themselves "mortgage brokers" then if they weren't interested in brokering mortgages :rotfl:

Banks and building societies were the same, certainly in the early 90's when I got my first mortgage. They all tried to steer you towards an endowment. A couple of banks flat out refused to give me a repayment/interest only mortgage (I don't know whether that was the bank's actual policy or just the individual sales staff technique of trying to force people to take endowments). It was clear that the staff were either on commission or had targets to sell endowments as everywhere gave the hard sell on them.

By the time I took out my second mortgage in the late 90's the banks had stopped pushing endowments, I guess the sales focus was on PPI by then

COLOURBOUNCE

dunstonh wrote: »

I never understand why people prefer to remain ignorant rather than learn and understand the issues and why things happened as they did. I guess it is easier to have the knowledge built up on Daily Mail headlines than facts.

Not a case of being ignorant. This product was sold on the back of abusive lies, in every case. To have to go through the miss-selling process, when the industry should have just been made to hold their hands up and level it, is an insult in itself. Don't confuse the issue with how you feel things are done correctly now, this episode should never be forgotten no matter how you dress it.