Hargreaves Lansdown - Terrible service

Party_Animal

"I didn't come on here to get into an argument however. I'm fairly chilled myself but do think people who aren't have every right to be upset. What's a small amount of money to some is a large sum to others"

I think the sum involved is irrelevant. It's a very poor level of service whether you're a big investor or an oap risking their pension money.

Tombola591

Party_Animal wrote: »

"I didn't come on here to get into an argument however. I'm fairly chilled myself but do think people who aren't have every right to be upset. What's a small amount of money to some is a large sum to others"

I think the sum involved is irrelevant. It's a very poor level of service whether you're a big investor or an oap risking their pension money.

I completely agree.

ChopperST

SAHD_Jim wrote: »

That is an oxymoron.

Err yes?

That was entirely my point?!

Greebtoo

This has been so frustrating. First no allocation of RM shares because more than £10k application ... but I really wanted to reinvest the proceeds in something else this morning and have been prevented from doing so. To find a way round I have opened a new account this morning with Charles Stanley and invested with them instead. I have also taken the opportunity to compare fees. Guess who is getting all my fund business going forward which is substantial. I have been very happy with HL thus far but this has been a huge own goal. The market movement of 0.5% since i wanted to invest this morning and was able to has cost me £250 and my wife and I didn't get any RM so it has not been a good day !

Glen_Clark

I don't use Hargreaves Lansdown, being a Skinflint I use X-O because its cheaper, and have not had any problems with them.
But its only fair to point out that even if HL expected 3 times the volume of trade what they could have done to prepare? 3 times as many offices? 3 times as many fully trained staff? 3 times as many computers? - for a couple of hours once in 10 years event?

StevieJ

Glen_Clark wrote: »

I don't use Hargreaves Lansdown, being a Skinflint I use X-O because its cheaper, and have not had any problems with them.
But its only fair to point out that even if HL expected 3 times the volume of trade what they could have done to prepare? 3 times as many offices? 3 times as many fully trained staff? 3 times as many computers? - for a couple of hours once in 10 years event?

They could have explained to people applying that they would be unlikely to unload their shares during the conditional dealing period due to the potential problems?

SAHD_Jim

chucknorris wrote: »

I'm sure that they will just about be able to manage and stay in business without your mother's custom.

Not my point at all.

It is your pathetic attitude that allows companies like this to make huge profits while at the same time not putting systems in place to ensure customers get a decent level of service that they should be able to expect. They are simply greedy and want to do business on the cheap.

SAHD_Jim

Glen_Clark wrote: »

I don't use Hargreaves Lansdown, being a Skinflint I use X-O because its cheaper, and have not had any problems with them.
But its only fair to point out that even if HL expected 3 times the volume of trade what they could have done to prepare? 3 times as many offices? 3 times as many fully trained staff? 3 times as many computers? - for a couple of hours once in 10 years event?

They are the largest online broker with something like half a million customers. If they are not able to deal with the volumes of business they agreed to take on then their systems are not fit for purpose, whether it is a daily, weekly, annually or decadely* event. As you say, X-O could handle their volume, same goes for my broker TD Direct. HL were the most prominent broker pushing the IPO and didn't have the infrastructure to cope. Did they expect that 700,000 retail investors were planning to sit on those shares for the long term?

*not sure if that is a word.

torus

I've only been using HL since April (having invested a substantial amount due to a legacy) and am appalled by their service - today is the last straw and is actually the 3rd day since April when I have been unable to login for several hours to trade. It's all very well people defending them and say this was a 'once in a blue moon' type event with the RM sell off. The point being that any platform need to have computer systems robust enough to cope with that 'once in a blue moon' event as it could be you wanting to ditch your BP shares asap when they have a spillage or some over major event affecting the markets. I am certainly going to move a lot of my investments elsewhere. Does anyone have any experience in BestInvest as they were a close runner-up when I originally chose HL.

chucknorris

SAHD_Jim wrote: »

Not my point at all.

It is your pathetic attitude that allows companies like this to make huge profits while at the same time not putting systems in place to ensure customers get a decent level of service that they should be able to expect. They are simply greedy and want to do business on the cheap.

I beg to differ it is your attitude that is wanting, unfortunately HL have experienced a problem and apologised to their customers. Having been in business myself I can understand how things can go wrong.