Is this acceptable?

dunstonh

Way back I was a lone voice warning about a company called Rockingham Retirement.... got berated as well then!

Really? I got threatened with legal action by Steve Hunt from Rockingham because I pointed out the issues on this board.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1247921
or
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2166639

Plus other threads if anyone is really bothered. You joined in on these threads (mostly under your previously banned login Whiteflag) but you were not a lone voice and you were not berated.

innovate

feesarefare wrote: »

seems like it a lone voice trying to alert the public to the reality of financial services regulation in the UK!

If you feel so strongly about it, where have you been all those months, and why do you need to hijack someone else's thread to voice your views?

ccbrowning

All of this IFA talk is well and good, but perhaps go argue and/or pontificate in a separate thread? The OP had a problem and asked for help and it's all seriously gone sideways...

dunstonh

feesarefare wrote: »

dunstonh wrote: »

Just reread that thread, why did you get threatened?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1247921
or
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2166639



Agreed, it just felt like it!:o

He threatened me with libel as he said the things I posted were wrong. Seeing as the FSA agreed with it all - but took them some years to see what we were saying, he never followed through on it.

jamesd

feesarefare wrote: »

interesting, what experience do you have of these techniques being used.

If the market is really competitive some firms might try that approach. If it's not, I doubt any will.

My own confidence in IFA PI cover is low based on the experience of investors with Rockingham, who found that the PI insurer could simply withdraw the PI policy and escape liability because the cover doesn't pay based on the cover in place at the time a sale or service happened but when a claim is made. So if it turns out that a firm did badly the PI firm can just dodge and leave consumers stuck.

innovate

feesarefare wrote: »

Sorry I didnt know there were rules about when I am / am not allowed to come on here and post.

Might look like Hijack, I just think its good manners to reply when people have taken time to make a relevant post.

Whats been said in this thread should be useful to anyone considering financial planning or advice. Unfortunately there seems to be a small group that without making their agenda clear dont want to hear the truth.

Everyone can start a new thread if they have something they'd like to talk about. But common courtesy would dictate that nobody hijacks another person's thread to discuss matters that concern themselves.

By responding to your posts, I am beginning to become just as guilty as you are. Therefore I'll bow out now.

craftmoney13

Remember me, I asked a simple question? Thanks to the ones who took an interest anyway. So, this FA who advised me to transfer this money then abandoned me was doing the job he was meant to was he? Well it's the Halifax to blame I think, what a way to treat customers.

dunstonh

feesarefare wrote: »

dunstonh wrote: »

Yep I think it was because you had the IFA bit in your signature and I didn't , he picked on you . They were certainly interesting times. Whatever anyone thinks about IFA/restricted/tied I think the rocking ham shambles demonstrates how important it is to dig a bit deeper and not just rely on the Ifa designation for the mark of a quality adviser.

I think it was a big conflict of interest and IFAs should not be allowed to be product providers. I would avoid IFAs that retail their own product. Especially if they end up recommending their own product.

dunstonh

craftmoney13 wrote: »

Remember me, I asked a simple question? Thanks to the ones who took an interest anyway. So, this FA who advised me to transfer this money then abandoned me was doing the job he was meant to was he? Well it's the Halifax to blame I think, what a way to treat customers.

The FA did the job you asked him to do. No more. No less. He was a transactional IFA not employed to give servicing. You did not pay for servicing. They were not employed for servicing and you didnt get servicing.

Whilst the products and funds of Halifax are poor, that is all he could offer you as a restricted adviser. Your story is one you see daily with restricted sales from banks in particular but there is no wrong doing. Just a big gap in expectation and delivery.

innovate

dunstonh wrote: »

The FA did the job you asked him to do. No more. No less. He was a transactional IFA not employed to give servicing. You did not pay for servicing. They were not employed for servicing and you didnt get servicing.

Whilst the products and funds of Halifax are poor, that is all he could offer you as a restricted adviser. Your story is one you see daily with restricted sales from banks in particular but there is no wrong doing. Just a big gap in expectation and delivery.

Oh dear, I think good ole' dunstonh got carried away now amongst all that off-topic debate about the various flavours financial advisors come/came/will come in.

I believe he was meant to say "He was a transactional FA" (not IFA), because banks never did have any IFAs.

Sorry, craftmoney13, but I don't think you have anywhere to go for compensation or correction or what have you. Many banks sold their investments to many of their customers, you are in good company (of people who bought something less than optimal). But the hard truth is, you were a gullable customer who bought an investment you were sold under legitimate circumstances.

As I have said before, your investment might not be all that bad - - you can't really tell after just a few months. However, you are likely to be able to do a lot better with your further investments if you stay away from outfits that have a limited range of investments to offer, such as banks, insurance companies, and Financial Advisors who are not offering you access to the full range of investment products available to Joe Public (aka 'restricted advisors').

Find yourself a proper independent financial advisor (IFA) and chew your situation over with them.