Leaving HL without transfer charges

masonic

Stanley_St wrote: »

Nothing left my accounts well after 6 weeks, and no management fees deducted either as far as I can see...

No fees were deducted from my account either. I wasn't expecting that to be quite so easy.

Rollinghome

naedanger wrote: »

I suspect not, since they don't seem to be very interested in preventing HL charging customers exit fees when it is unfair to do so, according to official guidance.

Of course I think they should be interested, I just don't think they will be.

Could be argued that after a rocky start HL have handled it quite effectively, from their point of view, and so largely prevented any involvement by the regulators.

They avoided recognising complaints as being complaints unless they had no choice but then came to reasonable settlements in all the cases we've heard of so that no reasonable complaints could go forward to the ombudsman. With everyone apparently happy there hasn't been much for the FCA to get their teeth into.

Whether they've handled it so well from a reputational point of view in the medium term has yet to be seen but then RDR was always going to be tricky for them when clients realised how much they were paying.

le_loup

Bad reputation on here, but I suspect the subscribers to the relevant threads are a tiny handful of customers. The press, whilst emphasising the high cost have not torn into them in the way that we have. Look at the gentle way they were handled on Money Box.
I think they have got away with it and may not have lost more than a tiny percentage of clients who have believed H-L's hype about how much money they have saved.

naedanger

Rollinghome wrote: »

Could be argued that after a rocky start HL have handled it quite effectively, from their point of view, and so largely prevented any involvement by the regulators.

They avoided recognising complaints as being complaints unless they had no choice but then came to reasonable settlements in all the cases we've heard of so that no reasonable complaints could go forward to the ombudsman. With everyone apparently happy there hasn't been much for the FCA to get their teeth into.

Whether they've handled it so well from a reputational point of view in the medium term has yet to be seen but then RDR was always going to be tricky for them when clients realised how much they were paying.

I can see from a commercial viewpoint HL have handled it well. They judged the FCA would not force them to reverse their decision and they were correct. They have therefore avoided the significant cost and higher transfers they are likely to have seen had they followed official guidance and offered all customers the opportunity to exit free of charge.

However I think the FCA have acted negligently. By not enforcing official guidance they have allowed HL to put their own commercial interests ahead of their requirement to treat all customers fairly. If the FCA are only going to worry about customers who know how to complain effectively (and who HL are treating fairly) then they have a much easier job, since those customers usually know how to take care of themselves.

In summary not the FCA's finest hour.

stanthemannn

Exit fees are v topical at the moment with this FCA announcement about investigating insurance comps back to 1970 re unfairness of exit fees. Gonna see big pay out Like ppi

Re hl . Worked out it was actually better for my relatively modest amount invested to just take the hit. Investors chronicle article from day or so ago gave a comparison of s&s isa providers and Axa self investor was cheapest this year with no fees just fund charges. Although only have funds no share dealing just yet .investorschronicle.co.uk/63b4d7b2-b991-11e3-b74f-00144feabdc0

naedanger

stanthemannn wrote: »

Worked out it was actually better for my relatively modest amount invested to just take the hit.

Can I ask what you mean by "just take the hit"? Do you mean remain with HL and possibly pay slightly higher charges? If you mean pay to exit then you should not need to take that hit. If you formally complain they will refund any exit fees (or at least they have so far for everyone who has formally complained).

Rollinghome

stanthemannn wrote: »

Re hl . Worked out it was actually better for my relatively modest amount invested to just take the hit. Investors chronicle article from day or so ago gave a comparison of s&s isa providers and Axa self investor was cheapest this year with no fees just fund charges. Although only have funds no share dealing just yet .investorschronicle.co.uk/63b4d7b2-b991-11e3-b74f-00144feabdc0

Poor article that's little more than a rehash of a typically Daily Mail article from weeks ago. Uses the same table using criteria that tends to favour certain providers. Comes from Holly Mackay's Platforum whose independence is unclear and has a habit of repeating whatever HL's publicity department tells her (as in her Money Box interview).

You'd get a more accurate comparison using SnowMan's downloadable spreadsheet here . You need to take all charges into account, including those in future should you decide to move somewhere more competitive..

jiggy2

naedanger wrote: »

It may be worth checking to see what HL say is the reason for the delay. If they are deliberately delaying the transfer through their incompetence then I would be sending them a formal letter of complaint over the matter.

Thanks - I have sent them a secure message, and will see what they say. I would probably think it more a case of left hand not knowing what the right says than deliberate.

fozzeh

bossymoo wrote: »

My letter arrived, waiving exit fees and not charging management fees while transfer proceeds. Guess I'm in for a long wait. Would the FCA be interested to hear how long the transfers are taking?

I think they would and should be but...

naedanger wrote: »

I can see from a commercial viewpoint HL have handled it well. They judged the FCA would not force them to reverse their decision and they were correct. They have therefore avoided the significant cost and higher transfers they are likely to have seen had they followed official guidance and offered all customers the opportunity to exit free of charge.

However I think the FCA have acted negligently. By not enforcing official guidance they have allowed HL to put their own commercial interests ahead of their requirement to treat all customers fairly. If the FCA are only going to worry about customers who know how to complain effectively (and who HL are treating fairly) then they have a much easier job, since those customers usually know how to take care of themselves.

In summary not the FCA's finest hour.

...this sums it all up for me also!

gterr

Most of my investments have now been transferred from HL to their new homes. However, for some reason I have one fund still showing in my HL ISA - despite the fact that it's also showing in its new home with Charles Stanley. It's been like that for nearly two weeks now. I wonder what would happen if I tried to sell the fund that appears to still be with HL, and pocket the cash. It's about £4k in value. (Just a hypothetical question - I don't really plan to do it.)


Also, the uninvested cash associated with both my Fund and Share account and my ISA has gone missing. Disappeared from HL, and has not resurfaced at either iii or CSD. I've had no documentation from HL to explain what's happened, and because my Fund and Share account has now fully transferred from HL I can't see any of the transaction details. (The transfers themselves don't seem to be listed as transactions, anyway, but I would have expected to see something regarding the handling of the cash.)


Husband has the opposite problem. All his funds have transferred, but the small amount of cash remains at HL, over two weeks later. It's like a little ghost of our time at HL.