What/Where to invest?

dunstonh

I must admit now I am pretty confused.

First of all I shouldn't do it DIY and should get some advice.
Then I've finally found some FAs that I think are good and I shouldn't use them ???

You said you wanted servicing but have been using advisers which operate on a transactional basis rather than an ongoing basis.

You then have identified a company that you appear to like but they are a national salesforce and the bulk of these work on transactional basis which is what you didnt like before.

So, there is a good chance you will be disapointed again. However, you wont know that until later on down the road when you dont get approached to rebalance or there is someone else going to deal with you as the other person has moved on (salesforces generally have problems with staff turnover).

All we are saying is that you were being critical of the transactional business model for advisers but have chosen to look at another that works that same way. You can do whatever you like. Use them, do DIY etc but all we are doing is pointing out that you have used a type of adviser in the past you are not keen on but appear to be heading that way again.

jem16

lisyloo wrote: »

I must admit now I am pretty confused.

First of all I shouldn't do it DIY and should get some advice.

I wasn't suggesting you don't do DIY. If you feel you know enough to go DIY and therefore save on charges/fess then go for it.

However you seemed to suggest that H-L's multi manager funds would be a good way forward for you, the "lazy investor" as you put it. This would suggest that you are not looking to keep an eye on things yourself but wanted someone to manage it. As the annual charges for the multi-manager funds are higher than what you would pay an IFA giving advice it seemed to me to me that you would be better looking for an IFA.

lisyloo

You then have identified a company that you appear to like but they are a national salesforce and the bulk of these work on transactional basis which is what you didnt like before.

Thanks for the explanation.
My employer has been working with these advisors for about 18 months now, so I have seen how they work as they already advised me on pensions (both the employer one and my previous ones).
They have helped me with fund choices and transferred 2 of my other pensions.

They DO turn up regularly so I can get a face to face appointment easily and they do provide on-going service.
I'm under no illusions that this is because they want to keep the large account but I know I would receive on-going service from them on the back of their willingness to provide good service to the company as a whole.

Many people in the company won't bother as they aren't interested.
I would be one of their higher maintenance customer but as long as they get paid and the company are happy overall then that's fine.
I don't believe I'll get the same level of service if I went individually to an IFA.
Many people are apathetic and don't bother.
So in-effect I'm getting a larger slice of their time and services in-lieu of other people's apathy.

At the moment it looks like my two choices are either to ask these guys for advice, or to do reasearch myself and choose my own funds.
I don't think I'm lazy but it's just not an area that I find interesting so I know I'm not going to enjoy it.

jamesd

lisyloo, that ongoing servicing you're getting sounds reasonable.

If you don't mind me asking, what investments have they advised you to use? That would let people here give you some indication of the quality of the advice.

The pension transfers would probably have made them money so they would have had an incentive to do that anyway.

lisyloo

If you don't mind me asking, what investments have they advised you to use?

The ones they have been involved with

With Scottish Equitable I am
50% Universal Balanced Collection and
50% Global

For protected rights (Norwich Union) I am in the
Stakeholder with-profits fund.

For NPI I am
50% Global care managed

The pension transfers would probably have made them money so they would have had an incentive to do that anyway.

Yes I'm quite aware of that.
I don't expect them to work for free.

It's me that want to review and consolidate (if possible) the 6 or 7 pensions I have for several reasons.
1) To minimise charges
2) to improve fund choices
3) To make it easier to manage by transferring as long as that doesn't compomise other aims.

Where they are fixed monthly fees (rather than %s) then obviously having 7 pensions is a lot worse than having 1.

jamesd

You might take a look at my comments in Scottish Equitable PPP. Based on what I saw there I doubt that it's a good idea to keep the Scottish Equitable ones. Universal Balanced is effectively a Balanced Managed tracker and I saw that the Scottish Widows one did better than that. The NPI Global Care Managed seems a lot better than the Scottish Equitable one (rank 45 instead of 230 out of 528) but still worse than the SW Investec external choice at 11 out of 528.

The Scottish Equitable global looks quite good compared to the rest of that pension sector. Roughly comparable with the SW one.

lisyloo

You might take a look at my comments in Scottish Equitable PPP. Based on what I saw there I doubt that it's a good idea to keep the Scottish Equitable ones. Universal Balanced is effectively a Balanced Managed tracker and I saw that the Scottish Widows one did better than that.

Hi James,

Thanks for your input but my employer is willing to put around £2300 in their scottish Equitable GPP ONLY.

Now I'm not saying that Scottish Equitable are the best but I doubt very much that I can find something else that is SO good that it makes up for the loss of my employers contribution.

I'm afraid in my industry it always works like that.
You have to take the employers GPP or lose their (relatively generous) contribution.

The NPI Global Care Managed seems a lot better than the Scottish Equitable one (rank 45 instead of 230 out of 528) but still worse than the SW Investec external choice at 11 out of 528.

NPI were bought by AMP some time back.
I believe there is a huge MVA on this pension meaning that I can't transfer it.
Are you saying that the SW Investec fund is availabale from NPI? (I know they have some external funds).
Does your "recommendation" take into account the extra charges I'd have to pay for using an external fund? (as I can't transfer this pension without huge penalties).

jamesd

There won't be anything good enough to make up for losing the employer's contribution. It might be possible to transfer existing balances, though.

The SW external Investec fund is available from SW. I've no idea if it's available from NPI, I didn't look. The NPI fund isn't bad and a big MVA might easily make it a bad idea to switch.

EdInvestor

IMHO the best arrangment for lazy investors is a bunch of ETF trackers in a SIPP. There are so many of these trackers now that pretty well all risk levels and tastes can be covered, all the major stockmarkets, bonds, gilts property etc. They are cheap - only 0.4% a year. Select half a dozen, divide the money up, buy the share and you're done.

For someone who is forced to accumulate GPPs and changes employers regularly, a cheap online SIPP is ideal for the old lump sum GPPs - just move over the money and then stick it in the ETFs. The SIPP charge p.a is zero.

Once or twice a year pop in and invest any dividends you find accumulated in the cash account. You'll pay a transaction charge for that, but that's all you'll pay, no stamp duty.

Easy peasy, not much time needed to set it up and no ongoing advice required.

You can see the selection of ETF trackers now available here:

https://www.ishares.net