Leaving HL without transfer charges

lejog2003

masonic wrote: »

Since you've made the point that the price increase was not a regulatory requirement is it worth adding that the OFT does not consider price increases, even associated with so called 'valid reasons', to be fair unless a customer can exit the contract freely?

Its a very valid point which people should use if they want but I was presently specifically replying to what HL said to me. As Snowman has pointed out they may come back and try another of their exclusion clauses (there's one about costs being fairly allocated) so I was leaving that one up my sleeve for now.

masonic

lejog2003 wrote: »

Its a very valid point which people should use if they want but I was presently specifically replying to what HL said to me. As Snowman has pointed out they may come back and try another of their exclusion clauses (there's one about costs being fairly allocated) so I was leaving that one up my sleeve for now.

It would be great if they tried to do that because you could argue their inconsistent answers show they are making excuses after the fact and the real reason for the change was something else.

grey_gym_sock

masonic wrote: »

It would be great if they tried to do that because you could argue their inconsistent answers show they are making excuses after the fact and the real reason for the change was something else.

it's lucky they're not reading this forum

masonic

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

it's lucky they're not reading this forum

Hehe, if they weren't, I'd happily give them that one free of charge. Sticking to their "FCA made us do it" excuse won't help them either and probably wouldn't earn them any brownie points further down the line...

naedanger

I have been lurking on this thread because I too have been adversely hit by Hargreaves Lansdown's charge increases. The following is my suggested letter of complaint to them (based on emails/letters I have already sent).

---

Senior Client Services Manager
Hargreaves Lansdown
One College Square South
Anchor Road
Bristol
BS1 5HL


Dear Sir/Madam

COMPLAINT – Refusal to Waive Exit Charges Following Unilateral Charge Increases

The charge increases that you announced this month are unacceptable to me [as I will be paying [significantly] more as a result]. However I understand you are refusing to waive your normal exit charges. I therefore wish to complain that you are refusing to allow me to exit freely and without charge following your unilateral action.

Can you please confirm that this is your final position and that I can now take my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service? Alternatively please confirm that you will now waive/refund these charges.

I believe that by denying me a charge free exit your unilateral increase in charges is both unfair and contrary to FSA and OFT guidance. (For example section 12.4 of the OFT's “Guidance for the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999” published in September 2008 highlights that a valid reason for varying a contract, such as a regulatory change, is NOT sufficient for a price change to be fair. Consumers must also be given the chance to cancel freely.)

There is nothing unusual to consider about my case. Therefore I expect a prompt answer.

Please do not telephone me about this matter. For evidence purposes I wish all communication to be in writing.

Yours,

---

Notes
1. If the reason the price changes are unacceptable to you is not because you will be paying significantly more as a result then obviously change the bit in square brackets e.g. to “as I object to the new probate valuation charge” or whatever.

2. I have deliberately kept the complaint short because Hargreaves Lansdown know (or should know) the situation. There is not some customer specific point that needs to be explained to them.

3. Furthermore my aim is to get my complaint to FOS with minimum fuss since I believe they are much more likely to listen than Hargreaves Lansdown. Indeed my experience of corresponding with Hargreaves Lansdown is that they appear to be much more interested in trying to dissuade me from continuing with my complaint than in understanding my viewpoint.

4. If I receive any further delaying replies I intend to reply along the lines of “You may believe your action is reasonable but I still believe that by denying me a charge free exit your unilateral increase in charges is both unfair and contrary to FSA and OFT guidance. I have listened to all you have said so please do not delay further. Please confirm that your final response is that you will not waive your normal exit charges so that I may take my complaint to FOS.” [And repeat with any further, non final, responses.]

5. I realise many people will want to give Hargreaves Lansdown as strong a case as possible in their first letter(s) to Hargreaves Lansdown. I am not against that approach although it is not the one I am following. The above draft is just in case it may help someone who wants a short letter.

6. When I write to FOS (which may not be for eight weeks if HL delay) I will elaborate in that letter on why Hargreaves Lansdown's refusal to offer a charge free exit is both unfair and contrary to FSA and OFT guidance. I suspect that this will not actually be necessary as I suspect the FOS will see Hargreaves Lansdown's actions as clearly unfair. However better safe than sorry.

7. Also thanks to those who have written earlier (including snowman, malfesto and masonic), especially for highlighting the previous complaints and the OFT and FSA guidance that exists.

8. Finally I have written to the FSA's Unfair Contract Terms Team, in line with the suggestion given earlier. I would urge everyone else to do the same. If the FSA do take an interest I am sure they will force HL to waive exit costs and give a sufficient window of time for people to transfer. However I think they will only get involved if they get a reasonable volume of complaints.

Regards,
naedanger

masonic

naedanger wrote: »

The charge increases that you announced this month are unacceptable to me [as I will be paying [significantly] more as a result]. However I understand you are refusing to waive your normal exit charges. I therefore wish to complain that you are refusing to allow me to exit freely and without charge following your unilateral action.

I would be tempted to use terminology "unilateral variation of the contract" or similar in keeping with the documents to which you refer later.

Can you please confirm that this is your final position and that I can now take my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service?

It might be better to ask them to communicate their final position without delay or similar. They are at least going to have to review the complaint and state their position in response to it before allowing you to proceed to escalate things.

Alternatively please confirm that you will now waive/refund these charges.

I believe that by denying me a charge free exit your unilateral increase in charges is both unfair and contrary to FSA and OFT guidance. (For example section 12.4 of the OFT's “Guidance for the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999” published in September 2008 highlights that a valid reason for varying a contract, such as a regulatory change, is NOT sufficient for a price change to be fair. Consumers must also be given the chance to cancel freely.)

There is nothing unusual to consider about my case. Therefore I expect a prompt answer.

Please do not telephone me about this matter. For evidence purposes I wish all communication to be in writing.

Yours,

---

<snip>

I think it's perfectly reasonable to keep it simple. My approach is to push quite hard for HL to consider the error of their ways ahead of any adjudication and I rather think I will not need to take it any further, but this approach is better if HL stick to their guns.

lejog2003

masonic wrote: »

It would be great if they tried to do that because you could argue their inconsistent answers show they are making excuses after the fact and the real reason for the change was something else.

:)

Like protecting their profit margins? Tut, tut what a thought.

petepool

Just been reading this thread having realising I'm being hit with a 300% increase in my SIPP costs, mainly held in EFTs.

I haven't contacted HL yet or decided where to go althought Interactive Investor looks better for me. Given this is my first contact with HL on this matter I'll try the short letter. Thanks to naedanger for that and for all the other detailed input earlier in the post.

Tweaked the short version slightly based on masonic's comments and sent this

Dear Sir/Madam

The charge increases that you announced this month are unacceptable to me as I will be paying approximately 300% more as a result. However I understand you are refusing to waive your normal exit charges. I therefore wish to complain that you are refusing to allow me to exit freely and without charge following your unilateral variation of contract.

Can you please confirm that this is your final position or alternatively please confirm that you will now waive/refund these charges. A prompt response would be appreciated to allow me to decide whether to progress this complaint further and to transfer my business before they take effect.

I believe that by denying me a free exit your unilateral increase in charges is both unfair and contrary to FSA and OFT guidance. (For example section 12.4 of the OFT's “Guidance for the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999” published in September 2008 highlights that a valid reason for varying a contract, such as a regulatory change, is NOT sufficient for a price change to be fair. Consumers must also be given the chance to cancel freely.)

There is nothing unusual to consider about my case. Therefore I expect a prompt answer.

Please do not telephone me about this matter. For evidence purposes I wish all communication to be in writing.

Yours,

mutley74

I enough people complain via social media such as FB and Twitter to HL they might listen! Its worked with other companies when I have encountered problems.
I tried tweeting to HL but they wont reply, but if more people did tweets they might realise they have some unhappy customers

SnowMan

Has anyone thought of seeing if BBC moneybox want to run a story on this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/features/money-box/contact/