Is this acceptable?

atush

and what you have now?

Gosh, this is like pulling teeth out with a string.

le_loup

atush wrote: »

Gosh

You may be becoming too anglicised!

atush

Ok, Geez Louise then

jackyann

innovate wrote: »

How do you define an 'ethical provider', can you name them? What are the stocks and shares in the ISA?

Having been involved in the Fair Trade movement for 30 years, I know that defining "ethical" trading isn't easy, and I was using the word as a shorthand (should have realised someone here would delve deeper!) meaning I had given some consideration.
Anyway, it is the Co-op's UK Growth trust. Not as "ethical" as some, but more than others. I am giving some consideration to some other providers, but have made no decisions.

jem16

atush wrote: »

and here i was thinking (not having read your previous post) it stood for the republic of ireland.

Probably makes as much sense in connection with final salary pensions as Return on Investment or Rate of Interest.

However it seems that VfM4meplse isn't planning to enlighten us.

jem16

atush wrote: »

and what you have now?

Post 25 atush;

craftmoney13 wrote: »

jem16 what I have is a capital protected fund 21 shareclass M accumulation and cautious growth shareclass D accumulation. As advised I need to really look into what I have etc. I thought it was all tax free but not sure if they are both ISA. One is, the other is OEIC whatever that means.

The only problem is that the OP doesn't know whether both funds are inside the ISA wrapper or only one of them as he/she isn't fully understanding the terms.

jem16

craftmoney13 wrote: »

What I had was a S+S ISA with Architas

Presumably one of their multi-manager funds - which one?

Presumably you could have added to that? So how has it performed?

Zebra

jem16 wrote: »

Presumably one of their multi-manager funds - which one?

Presumably you could have added to that? So how has it performed?

What she had is irrelevant. It's been and gone now. We are where we are and it's simply pointless looking at past investments and how they've performed, all it will do is confuse the OP even more.

In my opinion what she should do is study the investments that she has got, the alternatives open to her and then decide which are right for her circumstances.

Equally there's no rush into doing anything, it's possible to jump out the frying pan and into the fire.

The OP should take her time, consult an IFA if she thinks that may help, and make her decision when she is comfortable.

jem16

Zebra wrote: »

What she had is irrelevant. It's been and gone now. We are where we are and it's simply pointless looking at past investments and how they've performed, all it will do is confuse the OP even more.

My understanding is that the OP still has the Architas investment but I may be wrong.

doughnutmachine

jackyann wrote: »

I am wary of IFAs having received bad advice (which fortunately I didn't take!) but can see that they are not all the same. As the rules have changed, it should now be much clearer what you are being charged for.

tbh there hardly ever seems anyone posting on here with a good experience of an IFA.... i'm sure there are good IFAs but you wouldn't know it by reading this board.