Leaving HL without transfer charges

mkvrnn

I have today made a complaint to the FOS regarding HL's exit fees which I consider to be unjustified and in contravention of the Financial Conduct Authority's "Treating customers fairly" regulations.

I have also asked HL whether they are prepared to waive my exit fees or to grant a temporary amnesty on exit fees for any customers wishing to move as a result of increased charges.

The FOS complaints procedure is straightforward and free, so I would urge anybody in a similar position to do the same. Hopefully we can persuade HL to think again.

Stanley_St

naedanger wrote: »

Yes, the next step would be to ask them for a final response. I would also mention that this is so you can take your complaint to FOS so that they know you are serious.

Can I ask a couple of questions? Did HL send you a copy of their complaints procedure? And if not, was it obvious from your enquiry that you were dissatisfied that they were going to levy exit charges? I just wonder if HL are failing to alert customers to their complaints procedures.

Seems good advice. Perhaps letting them know you are serious is the trick.

In answer to your question, no information on their complaints procedure was received from HL. They contacted me via their secure messaging system. My message to them by the same route was polite, but did include the word complaint and I would hope indicated my dissatisfaction that they were proposing to levy exit charges on a customer who would be very much worse off under the new charging structure.

naedanger

Stanley_St wrote: »

In answer to your question, no information on their complaints procedure was received from HL. They contacted me via their secure messaging system. My message to them by the same route was polite, but did include the word complaint and I would hope indicated my dissatisfaction that they were proposing to levy exit charges on a customer who would be very much worse off under the new charging structure.

Looks like HL are not handling complaints fairly either. There is no information on their "contact us" webpage on how to complain and then when people do complain they don't recognise them as complaints. Should help keep the number of complaints down.

Stanley_St

naedanger wrote: »

Looks like HL are not handling complaints fairly either. There is no information on their "contact us" webpage on how to complain and then when people do complain they don't recognise them as complaints. Should help keep the number of complaints down.

Yes, the strategy seems to be to fob off anyone who wants to complain.

masonic

naedanger wrote: »

Looks like HL are not handling complaints fairly either. There is no information on their "contact us" webpage on how to complain and then when people do complain they don't recognise them as complaints. Should help keep the number of complaints down.

They do have a complaints page on their website: http://www.hl.co.uk/contact-us/how-to-make-a-complaint.

I sent my complaint in via their secure message system and marked it FAO: Senior Client Services Manager, and entitled it "Compaint", which seemed to do the trick.

If you send in a complaint and get fobbed off, it might be worth contacting the Financial Ombudsman Service for advice. They may be able to get involved earlier if procedures are not being followed correctly.

naedanger

masonic wrote: »

They do have a complaints page on their website: http://www.hl.co.uk/contact-us/how-to-make-a-complaint.

I agree they have a complaints page but it is not well publicised. You would expect to find a link to it (e.g. "how to make a complaint") in a prominent place, for example on the "contact-us" webpage. However that is not the case.

If their staff were well trained to recognise and act properly on a complaint then it would not matter. They would record a complaint however it was received, and then send the customer a copy of their complaints handling procedure. However when I first complained, and it seems Stanley St, they appear to have tried to fob us off with a stock answer without recognising our complaints.

I sent my complaint in via their secure message system and marked it FAO: Senior Client Services Manager, and entitled it "Compaint", which seemed to do the trick.

If you send in a complaint and get fobbed off, it might be worth contacting the Financial Ombudsman Service for advice. They may be able to get involved earlier if procedures are not being followed correctly.

I agree this is the way to go. Thanks.

malfesto

gterr wrote: »

I sent a PM to HL asking, specifically, if they intended to levy the new 0.45% charges if my account transfers (already requested) had not been completed by the time the new charges started, or would they waive them, given the circumstances. They replied that the new charges WOULD be levied from 1st March if my transfers had not completed by then.


II say that they anticipate the transfer to them will take between 6 and 8 weeks, and if that is the case I'll be paying HL's new charges in the interim.


I will be sending my second complaint letter to HL this weekend, which will include a longer argument for why I think their transfer charges should be waived, and will ask for their 'final decision' on the matter. I will now include in this complaint the business of charging the new fees when a transfer out is pending.


Perhaps HL will now realise that I, too, 'feel strongly' about their charges, and will do as I ask and waive them. If not, I definitely feel strongly enough to escalate the matter to FOS.

If you have taken steps to dissolve the contract ahead of the changes in T&Cs taking effect (consent has not been given to new contract terms), the firm should not charge the new fees or use any new contract terms while the process is taking place. Clearly those who are transferring out investments will be affected as in specie transfers can take anywhere between 6 to 12 weeks.

From the FSA Guidance (bold emphasis mine)

"The Regulations indicate that the consumer’s freedom to dissolve the contract may be a factor in a
unilateral variation term being less likely to be unfair and our experience is that firms sometimes fail to consider this. In our view, firms should bear in mind both the financial and the practical barriers which may prevent a consumer from exiting the contract if they object to a particular variation of a term."

Indicate to the firm (in writing before the date when T&C changes are to take place) that you have not accepted the unilateral changes to the contract, have made arrangements to transfer out your investments and for confirmation that the new charges will not apply (and exit charges waived) during the contract dissolution process. The firm should administer the account based on the previous agreed terms until the transfer/account closure is complete.

If the firm does use new terms on those who have started the transfer out process before the change in T&Cs takes place, then a supplemental claim to FOS for reimbursement of the new charges will be valid.

On the two occasions when I transferred out investments following changes to charging structures, both providers did not impose new account charges while the re-registration of my investments took place. The in-specie transfer process was only completed well beyond date when the T&C changes took effect.

The FCA has made transitional arrangements for legacy funds (trail bearing share class funds also known as dirty funds). The rule changes for legacy funds are to take effect on April 2016. Only clean funds which do not pay trail commission will be sold from April 2014 onwards. Hence, the rush of announcements of new charging structure by the various providers ahead of the new tax year.

However, providers are already explicitly charging customers for clean funds (to the best of my knowledge). So the rationale of imposing new charges on customers transferring away funds (either legacy or clean) should the re-registration process be delayed looks specious. Not to mention morally reprehensible.

Regards,

malfesto.

mkvrnn

There are two articles in Investors Chronicle about the same subject, together with a string of comments from disgruntled HL customers. Unfortunately I'm not allowed to post the links.

lejog2003

malfesto wrote: »

Indicate to the firm (in writing before the date when T&C changes are to take place) that you have not accepted the unilateral changes to the contract, have made arrangements to transfer out your investments and for confirmation that the new charges will not apply (and exit charges waived) during the contract dissolution process.

:T:T. Absolutely

SnowMan

mkvrnn wrote: »

There are two articles in Investors Chronicle about the same subject, together with a string of comments from disgruntled HL customers. Unfortunately I'm not allowed to post the links.

http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2014/01/31/comment/smart-money/how-to-complain-about-hargreaves-high-exit-fees-8JX3RKmFayZJfkjUOQgZrM/article.html