We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Danny Cox of Hargreaves Lansdown being pulled apart on Radio 4 Moneybox over new fees
Options
Comments
-
-
WOW, hardly ever come across a more arrogant and slippery attitude than that conveyed by Danny Cox. Definitely looking to move from HL now, even if I was only half-heartedly doing so before.0
-
guitarman001 wrote: »Oh? So I can move my LifeStrategy fund to another broker fee-free?
Only if you sell them and move the cash. No fee-free in-specie transfer I am afraid.0 -
Only if you sell them and move the cash. No fee-free in-specie transfer I am afraid.
None of the new charges other than the platform fee are required by RDR or any new regulations. They have been introduced in order to keep the headline figure low and obscure how expensive their service is. I think that was what Paul Lewis and Justin Modray meant by calling the charges "sneaky".
As this Guardian article makes clear, their overall margin has been 0.73% with 66% on Vantage accounts and, as they been briefing analysts, their profits will not be significantly reduced. Those numbers are a long way from the headline figure of 0.45%.
They have been telling two different stories. One story telling clients that they have slashed fees and started a price war, and another to shareholders telling them don't worry, we haven't really.
The new charge particularly mentioned by Modray was up to £600 for probate valuations that could hit newly bereaved widows and widowers but apart from that there's a whole raft of charges for what is already a very expensive service that aren't charged by much cheaper rivals - including those sky-high exit fees.0 -
Rollinghome wrote: »They have been telling two different stories. One story telling clients that they have slashed fees and started a price war, and another to shareholders telling them don't worry, we haven't really.
Supermarkets often do that, its par for the course.
The thing that shocked me was his insinuation your money isn't safe with his competitors, and just before the end of the interview. I have never heard that before. Since your investment is supposedly ring fenced in a nominee account the only way you could lose it is through Madoff type fraud. Is that what he is accusing his competitors of?“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” --Upton Sinclair0 -
organic_wanabe wrote: »Unbelievable! I have been with HL for years and now realise what an uninformed idiot I have been. Do they really believe that they will keep the majority of their clients?
They will keep the majority of their customers and quite likely continue to grow the business according to esteemed sources such as the FT. Not everyone is a loser with the new charges from HL.0 -
They will keep the majority of their customers and quite likely continue to grow the business according to esteemed sources such as the FT. Not everyone is a loser with the new charges from HL.
Previously HL customers may not have been aware they were paying substantially more. I would include you in that group as you said to me in June when I said to someone looking to switch to a new platform, possibly HL, that HL were likely to be expensive,Rubbish, you know no better than anyone else if in the future they will be expensive or not :-)
But now it is more obvious (perhaps even to you) that HL are expensive. There are posts on this forum where customers are saying they didn't realise how much they were paying to HL.
So the question is will those customers move to cheaper platforms? That is the question that is difficult to answer. Logic says they should but people don't always act in their own interests or logically.I came, I saw, I melted0 -
Well I think the charges pale into insignificence compared to Danny Cox's apparent suggestion at the end that his competitors are fraudulent (when he was backed into a corner over Hargreaves Lansdown's 73% profit margin)
But Hargreaves Lansdown customers were already paying dealing costs more than double their competitors so I don't see why they won't continue doing so.“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” --Upton Sinclair0 -
So the question is will those customers move to cheaper platforms? That is the question that is difficult to answer. Logic says they should but people don't always act in their own interests or logically.
The ones that are most likely to move are holders of trackers such as the Vanguard LifeStrategy as these are going to be considerably more expensive with the loss of the cross subsidy
I am curious about the announcement of the super low cost trackers from L&G and Blackrock at 0.06%. Unless I've got it wrong these could compare well (0.45 + 0.06 = 0.51) with say the VLS at Charles Stanley Direct (0.25 + 0.33 = 0.58) but I am happy to be corrected0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards