Leaving HL without transfer charges

masonic

organic_wanabe wrote: »

So what to do? I am trying to sort things out in my mind and wondered whether anyone can think of anything that I have missed? My mind is working along the lines of 'Why not move everything to Fidelity as they will pay all the transfer charges. If it doesn't work out after a year or so then take advantage of the fact that they say there is no exit fee for moving to another platform.'

The key will be clarifying the reason for leaving them. If I understand correctly, the main change that would adversely affect you is the introduction of the account closure and cash transfer fees now delayed until June. Those changes would give you a valid reason to use the same arguments others have used to get a free exit. As a bonus, HL would not be able to say those changes were necessary because of the new FCA regulations.

No harm in mentioning your feelings about their recent behaviour, but I think any complaint asking for exit fees to be waived should relate directly to your contract with HL and not their PR gaffes.

Edit: ...some further thoughts - you've seen that substantial increases to fees are possible, though they may not have affected you so far. You also know that after June you will pay higher fees to exit, so don't wish to put yourself at risk of being trapped and forced to accept higher fees in the future as a result of the changes being introduced in June.

masonic

juliamarsh wrote: »

Excellent, so glad you got the result you had been hoping for, I did too today! :beer:

That's excellent news. Unless I am mistaken, that is a 100% success record for people getting offers from HL when they push their complaints all the way to final response (or final final response in the case of ffacoffipawb ).

juliamarsh

diveleader wrote: »

So £500 cap across my Vantage (SIPP/ISA/unwrapped)
The comparison with ii looks to be £144, as if you pay ii SIPP charge you get the ISA and trading account FOC.

Thought this was wrong but have checked with III and you are absolutely right - how brilliant, I thought I was going to have to pay the SIPP charge and the £80 charge for the ISA/fund & share account! Thank you so much for alerting me to this!!

masonic

diveleader wrote: »

I am still 80% sure I will move due to:
- HL initial arrogance and hiding the increases in 'a reduction in charges' brownwash
- The fact they have changed my contract terms and expect me to start paying them after I elect to refuse them and commence transfer (something I have no control on timewise)

When considering offers of reduced fees, you and others should also consider how long you might be able to benefit from those offers. It won't be forever and could be just until HL decides it has enough clients paying full fees.

SnowMan

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

I have responded thus ....

Thank you for waiving the fees, which is the only sensible and fair thing to do, though getting this waived by yourselves has been like getting teeth pulled.

Good response :rotfl::T:beer:

lejog2003

masonic wrote: »

That's excellent news. Unless I am mistaken, that is a 100% success record for people getting offers from HL when they push their complaints all the way to final response (or final final response in the case of ffacoffipawb ).

Not quite, I hadn't got the offer I wanted wrt not charging the new platform fees from 1st March. But now I have, or to be exact the promise of a refund:

The new fees will be calculated on the last working day of March. This gives you a little under two months to organise a transfer (Bloody nerve, they were informed of my transfer 3 weeks ago now!) As a further gesture of goodwill, if at the end of March the transfer is underway but not complete, we will refund any charges levied under the new structure before the transfer completes.

I hope this is helpful to anyone ending up paying increased fees in the process of transfer.

The email I received yesterday was apparently HL's final response to my formal complaint although I am supposed to be physic since it failed to mention either of these facts. So presumably like ffacoffipawb today's is a final, final offer.:p The two emails I've received in the last two days have been utterly shambolic, I'll be drafting a pithy response too.

Having been issued a reference number by FOS, I'll contact them to say I'm now happy, but warning them that HL are writing final responses to complainants without identifying them as such, meaning that an appeal cannot be started.

And that's about it, thanks for all the help folks.

dave875933

Given that I am above the SIPPDEAL charges cap of £100 p.a. , the HL monies will not cost anything extra.

Great. And what exactly is to stop A J Bell upping that charge any time they like? Don't they have exit fees too with a massive list of reasons why they assert they can change fees in their terms and coniditions?

At least, surely those thinking they can get ETFs cheaper at A J Bell than an equivalent tracker fund might well find that the discrepancy is closed up soon?

Are we going to have another damn thread on how bad A J Bell are in a year? (You know, last year III, this year HL.) Another round of complaints to the FOS and the FCA?

What responsibility does the FCA take for this in that the RDR was bound to introduce chaos and no clear way forward was charted by them?

The effort in this thread is quite impressive, but it's also sad to see all that time wasted.

For the RDR to have any consumer benefit, the FCA must enforce zero or minimal exit fees on any significant fee changes, or indeed any significant service failure, and make sure that the transfer process can be completed in days not months, whether cash or in specie.

SnowMan

dave875933 wrote: »

Great. And what exactly is to stop A J Bell upping that charge any time they like? Don't they have exit fees too with a massive list of reasons why they assert they can change fees in their terms and conditions?

At least, surely those thinking they can get ETFs cheaper at A J Bell than an equivalent tracker fund might well find that the discrepancy is closed up soon?

You make a good point that investors should think very carefully indeed before investing with AJ Bell Youinvest.

They quadrupled my explicit charges within a year of me moving to them and then charged me 3 times the annual charge to leave. My case against them refusing to waive exit fees is at the Financial Ombudsman Service at the moment.

Youinvest mentioned in their response to my complaint that they believe they can increase charges for all manner of reasons for example stating in writing that they could change terms and conditions "to avoid cross-subsidy between customers e.g. where the provision of certain services is being charged on an uneconomic basis" without waiving exit charges. Of course the OFT unfair terms guidance seems to say this is complete nonsense but that won't stop Youinvest from my experience. So yes an increase in the SIPP administration charge or a new custody charge for ETFs and shares is completely possible, and could happen at any time subject to 30 days notice. If you are prepared to take a case to the FOS if this happens and are willing to experience the stress and inconvenience of having to take a case to the FOS then perhaps they are an option. But if you aren't the simple message is avoid them.

Youinvest also say they can increase exit fees with about 3 months notice to further trap customers in and if you try to leave because of that increase in exit fees then Youinvest will still charge you the high existing exit fees. Again their recent increase in exit fees shows they will actually do that in practice.

Youinvest clearly don't treat customers fairly from my experience and investors should think very before switching to them. There are cheaper platforms in most scenarios in any case.

ffacoffipawb

dave875933 wrote: »

Great. And what exactly is to stop A J Bell upping that charge any time they like? Don't they have exit fees too with a massive list of reasons why they assert they can change fees in their terms and coniditions?

At least, surely those thinking they can get ETFs cheaper at A J Bell than an equivalent tracker fund might well find that the discrepancy is closed up soon?

Are we going to have another damn thread on how bad A J Bell are in a year? (You know, last year III, this year HL.) Another round of complaints to the FOS and the FCA?

What responsibility does the FCA take for this in that the RDR was bound to introduce chaos and no clear way forward was charted by them?

The effort in this thread is quite impressive, but it's also sad to see all that time wasted.

For the RDR to have any consumer benefit, the FCA must enforce zero or minimal exit fees on any significant fee changes, or indeed any significant service failure, and make sure that the transfer process can be completed in days not months, whether cash or in specie.

AJ Bell have behaved better than HL and haven't chopped and changed their new charges.


I just hold investment trusts and think that AJ Bell's charge of £100 (or is it £80?) isn't too bad as it is less than 1% of the dividends that these are paying into my SIPP.



Had HL matched AJ Bell I would have transferred the other way, but after all the p1ssballing about they have been doing, I am glad to go. Free of charge.

ffacoffipawb

Received a letter from HL this morning stating that they have transferred my funds to AJ Bell via cheque. The amount quoted on the letter doesn't appear to have had the penalty charge applied, but I cannot see my SIPP account to confirm this as when I log in there is no account to see.