Tax Exempt Savings Plans [TESPs]

jem16

patientperson wrote: »

Jem16 question: Do you agree with pulling in unsuspecting people to totally unsuitable products for your own gain?

This was answered in my response post #112

It appears that my clear sentence ' I have never made any referral so also have never received anything.' has been ignored.

It was not ignored - it just did not answer my question.

At the time of my answer I should also have questioned the precise wording of Jem16 question regarding 'your own gain' as opposed to a general 'one's gain' which would have been more correct. 'Your own gain' implies my personal gain.

My apologies if I did not use the Queen's English correctly. I was not referring to you as in you personally.

I have made it clear that I have made no referrals and so has been no gain.

You also made it very clear that you think the onus is on the person being introduced to check out the details. This appears to imply that you are happy with the role of introducers receiving money/vouchers for "one's" own gain.

If I have this wrong then please correct me.

If the general attitude of some posters is to ignore answers given then please do not expect any further answer on the same question.

The problem with forums is that text does not always convey the correct picture and something can be read in different ways.

dunstonh

patientperson wrote: »

A general question. MSE does not permit referrals which is clearly stated. In this TESP thread the word 'tout' has cropped up. What do our posters consider the addition of text as below to mean and why was it necessary to be stated.

'I am an Independent Financial Adviser'

It is required to be stated for both board rules as compliance reasons.

jem16

patientperson wrote: »

A general question. MSE does not permit referrals which is clearly stated. In this TESP thread the word 'tout' has cropped up. What do our posters consider the addition of text as below to mean and why was it necessary to be stated.

'I am an Independent Financial Adviser'

I'll give you the benefit of doubt as a "newbie" and assume that you didn't mean to accuse dunstonh (or any other regular IFAs posting on this board) of touting for business.

Once you have been around for a lot longer and contributed to threads other than just this one, you will see that all the regular IFAs on this board provide lots of useful guidance/help here. Not once have I ever seen any of the regular IFAs suggest that they be contacted.

patientperson

dunstonh wrote: »

It is required to be stated for both board rules as compliance reasons.

Thank you .. it is clear now.

One can only marvel at the enormous number of postings that you have made - 67,189 since April 2004. Do you ever sleep?.

patientperson

jem16 wrote: »

I'll give you the benefit of doubt as a "newbie" and assume that you didn't mean to accuse dunstonh (or any other regular IFAs posting on this board) of touting for business.

Once you have been around for a lot longer and contributed to threads other than just this one, you will see that all the regular IFAs on this board provide lots of useful guidance/help here. Not once have I ever seen any of the regular IFAs suggest that they be contacted.

Questions coming from the other direction seem to ruffle some feathers. You are quite correct that as a 'newbie' then the regular posters are unknown to me. Interesting to know that there are other IFA on the BB.

The point was simply that the self declaration of job title could attract business.

jem16

patientperson wrote: »

Questions coming from the other direction seem to ruffle some feathers.

You do seem a little prone to misconceptions.

You are quite correct that as a 'newbie' then the regular posters are unknown to me. Interesting to know that there are other IFA on the BB.

Do stick around and try other parts of the forum. I'm sure you'll learn a lot by taking part in other threads.

The point was simply that the self declaration of job title could attract business.

I'm glad we sorted out that misconception for you.

planteria

a little query here....my Kingston Unity FS TESP and my Sheffield Mutual TESP. it has been suggested that investors would be 'lucky' to get their money back, as the 'Sum Assured', upon which bonuses are applied (which, in theory might Not be applied) is lower than the value that would be paid in over the life of the policy.....but that does not seem to be the case. the Sum Assured was always higher than the value i will pay in over the 10 years (3% to be precise), and bonuses have been applied on top of those during my first year. my understanding is that the only risk of not receiving my own investment back, plus bonuses, is if the Friendly Societies themselves were to fold. is that correct?

planteria

also, the concept of earning bonuses, however small in value/percentage terms, on money that you haven't yet invested....presumably that is what you get for committing to invest consistently for the period of the plan. is that correct?

planteria

noone? some posters were quick to tell us that these TESPs had a Sum Assured below the total investment over the term.

planteria

patientperson wrote: »

The point was simply that the self declaration of job title could attract business.

of course. whether it is denied or not. i don't have a problem with that....by contributing helpfully to a forum some readers could get a positive insight into the sort of person the IFA is. or they could get a negative one.