Leaving HL without transfer charges

darren72

Chris2000 wrote: »

£250. As was someone else earlier in this thread.

Thanks - I'll re-read the thread, as I missed that.

ffacoffipawb

Totton wrote: »

I'd be careful if holding around that amount as to where you move to. As details have emerged it seems you could be better off with HL than several of the other places people are seemingly jumping ship to in the panic we are witnessing.

I had £250k in a Youinvest SIPP invested in shares. The £50k from HL will be invested the same way and as a result there will be no charges apart from the £100 SIPP charge that I was paying anyway. The move was a no brainer really.

socrates

Received my letter this morning - complaint made 3 days ago

Charges waived and no increase as long a transfer is requested within a month of their letter

Same rubbish about - they have taken legal advice etc etc

Win win!

gadgetmind

My complaint was sent to them on the 10th by secure message but they haven't yet replied.

gadgetmind

BTW, are people being offered free transfers "in specie" or do they need to move to cash?

munk

I've also just received the same letter today (15th) agreeing to waive the transfer fees after complaining on Thursday (13th) about the unfair change to the T&C / charging structure combined with the lack of an easy 'route to exit' from the contract. So a very speedy response to be fair, but it sticks in the craw a bit the way their letter is composed - arguing that they do feel what they're doing is in accordance with the regulations and only grudgingly allowing us to exit without any fees.

For the first half of the letter I was convinced the result was negative. As mentioned above -the letter refers to how they've taken advice from lawyers / done extensive research of the rules/regulations/guidance and come to the conclusion that they don't need to waive the fees since the changes represent a unilateral variation brought about by regulatory change*. My heart sank slightly reading that because it sounded like they weren't going to give in.

But then half way down the letter they grudgingly cave in and essentially say that in my case (mmm... only in my case? :whatnorolleyessmiley?!: ) they will make an exception and allow me to exit for free if the transfer process is started within a month.

I would urge anyone else in the same situation to bite the bullet and send a secure message or letter to them. I sent a secure message with the subject along the lines of 'Waive transfer fees' and at the top of the message I put 'For the attention of: Senior Client Services Manager' (the response by letter was from an SCSM).

The gist of the content was that I wanted to transfer out and have the transfer fees waived because I didn't feel the term changes were fair and they'd given no easy way to exit the contract without significant financial penalty. I explained that I wanted confirmation whether the fees would be waived in writing and that a refusal would constitute official confirmation of their decision for the purposes of a complaint to the FOS (on the grounds that the term changes were unfair yet no easy/free exit route from the contract was provided).

For anyone else about to complain, just go for it. It seems like a fairly standard response they're taking here for anyone that highlights the fact that the changes are unfair (either you pay the increased fees, or you pay a potentially very high penalty fee to exit, with no other option to disagree with the changes).

It is a huge shame they've taken this approach though - forcing people to complain. They know not everyone will want to do that / that many are just too nice to threaten them with action. It's a very cynical move on their part and leaves a very bitter taste in the mouth (the icing on the cake has been the way they only very grudgingly gave in, arguing that they're still right but are being 'kind' enough to make an exception in this case).

Thanks to everyone on this thread anyway.

* - In my complaint I actually left out the point that I didn't feel their variation clause in their terms applied on regulatory grounds because they'd already started to charge a platform fee for some time on the Vanguard funds we hold. This was arguably a special case of moving to 'clean' funds ahead of the RDR changes anyway (since those funds are already clean in as much as no trail commission is paid, so they had to impose a platform fee to make their provision viable). So they'd already made the regulatory changes in our case and these new charges represented an arbitrary increase in fees, not as a result of regulatory change.

But it is a very moot point though and could be argued either way so I didn't bother even going there. I thought the overriding issue that counts more / makes irrelevant that argument ^ is the fact that unilateral variation is not 'carte blanche' for imposing unfair changes. The terms still have to be fair even if they are a result of regulatory change and if they're not fair then they need to provide an easy route to exit the contract (ie without financial penalty). Which they haven't.

Even if you wouldn't be materially worse off as a result of the changes I think you still have a good case to argue that you wanted the fees waived. HL have changed the terms without providing a free / easy exit route from the contract.

gadgetmind wrote: »

My complaint was sent to them on the 10th by secure message but they haven't yet replied.

gadgetmind wrote: »

BTW, are people being offered free transfers "in specie" or do they need to move to cash?

They didn't actually say in the letter that the fees would be waived specifically for in specie transfers, but given my original complaint mentioned in specie transfers I am satisfied that they imply that in specie transfer fees will be waived.

Maybe send another secure message and make sure it's for the attention of the Senior Client Services Manger with a subject that includes the word 'complaint'.

2shy

gadgetmind wrote: »

My complaint was sent to them on the 10th by secure message but they haven't yet replied.

Mine was sent on the 8th, and received my letter today.

Thanks for all the great advice here.

Rollinghome

gadgetmind wrote: »

BTW, are people being offered free transfers "in specie" or do they need to move to cash?

There currently aren't any fees for transferring out in cash: the new fees for closing accounts and for cash transfers aren't to be imposed until 2 June. To agree to waive any charges for transfers out but only mean where there aren't any charges anyway would be a tad too misleading even for Hargreaves Lansdown. I hope.

andy013

I revived my letter today. It sounds like it's the exact same letter as the rest of you. Time to start the transfer process now...

Paulo104

Hi
I just received my letter this morning saying they will waive exit charges from 1st march once I have had a chance to see their new charges and they are done within one month.
What I am concerned about is that I set the ball rolling last week to transfer my SIPP , ISA and share account to ATS where I already have accounts and they are likely to make the transfer before the end of this month so will HL still waive the charges if it happens before 1st March?
I am sure many others are also in this situation ?