Using an advisor for drawdown

atush

I am more worried about Over regulation, where even DIY has produced complaints that were upheld and compensation had to be paid.

That is crazy, but that is what we have now.

I can see a whole lotta people DIYing, making a balls up of it, then going for compensation cuz someone didn't stop them being a numpty.

mania112

tjh64 wrote: »

Is it really necessary to pay someone to borrow my watch and tell me the time?

If it was common that people thought they knew how to tell the time, but really they didn't.

Freecall

bmm78 wrote: »

It's about a regulated firm managing that risk, not a judgement on whether people are too stupid to understand the products.

I think that you are spot on, it is about the firm's risk, not that of the client.

I am sure that the OP (and others in a similar position) are quite happy for financial institutions to manage their risks, the question is why does he have to pay for it?

dunstonh

Freecall wrote: »

I think that you are spot on, it is about the firm's risk, not that of the client.

I am sure that the OP (and others in a similar position) are quite happy for financial institutions to manage their risks, the question is why does he have to pay for it?

it is correct. It is commercial risk. Just because a firm can do something does not mean it has to. Barclays lost a complaint recently where a DIY investor using a non-advice service geared for DIY lost money and complained. It was ruled that Barclays didnt do enough to protect the person from themselves despite having all the usual risk warnings in place.

There is also the position that why would anyone who is capable of DIY want to use Aviva directly anyway. That indicates a lack of knowledge to begin with.

bmm78

Freecall wrote: »

I think that you are spot on, it is about the firm's risk, not that of the client.

I am sure that the OP (and others in a similar position) are quite happy for financial institutions to manage their risks, the question is why does he have to pay for it?

Understand the point being made, but in a (slightly semantic) way the provider is not insisting that the client pays for the service. They are only insisting that the client receives advice when arranging it.

The advice will obviously need to be paid for, but the provider doesn't see any of that payment. What the client pays is a commercial arrangement between them and the adviser if they choose to go down that route.

Like dunstonh suggests, if the client wanted to go down the DIY route it would probably be better to transfer anyway, regardless of whether there was a "need" to.

zagfles

dunstonh wrote: »

There is also the position that why would anyone who is capable of DIY want to use Aviva directly anyway. That indicates a lack of knowledge to begin with.

Why not? That's where his money is, he may want it all out by April 2015, so why go to the bother of transferring and setting up drawdown with someone else.

Daniel54

zagfles wrote: »

Why not? That's where his money is, he may want it all out by April 2015, so why go to the bother of transferring and setting up drawdown with someone else.

I take your point.But these boards are full of people who have mis-bought and subsequently seek for reasons (and compensation) for being mis-sold

I am not sure how to address this.Caveat Emptor seems not to be the way the FCA views consumer choice.

zagfles

Daniel54 wrote: »

I take your point.But these boards are full of people who have mis-bought and subsequently seek for reasons (and compensation) for being mis-sold

I am not sure how to address this.Caveat Emptor seems not to be the way the FCA views consumer choice.

Indeed. But it doesn't make the OP stupid for (at least initially) wanting to drawdown direct from Aviva. Still I guess it keeps IFAs in business if they try to convince the rest of us we don't know what we're doing.

dunstonh

zagfles wrote: »

Indeed. But it doesn't make the OP stupid for (at least initially) wanting to drawdown direct from Aviva. Still I guess it keeps IFAs in business if they try to convince the rest of us we don't know what we're doing.

The only person that has used the word stupid is you. All I didsaid was that it indicates that he doesnt know as much as he thinks he does. That doesn't make you stupid in my opinion but you are entitled to yours. Buying direct from Aviva, if they offered it direct, is typically more expensive than buying via advice. That isn't the way a DIY investor would operate if they knew what they were doing.