My parents were mis-sold ISA's

le_loup

Martin300 wrote: »

I am asking for advice, not rudeness.

You got advice. I you perceive it to have been "rudely" put, I offer, like others, an unreserved apology.
Meanwhile, think about what I and others have said. Or ignore it; you chose.

Martin300

Thanks for (almost) all the replies to my question. It seems as though my parents were fleeced by this unscrupulous salesman. I suppose they should have asked about the fee before going ahead with this. After, when they discovered how much they had been charged, I suppose they were embarassed that they'd been taken for mugs. I remeber them telling me about this, and I told them there is a cooling off period, but they didn't want to talk about it.

From this I ask myself, what is more unfortunate - that there are some people who are too trusting to ask a person, when told that "there will be a fee", how much will this fee be? Or that we live in a society that we cannot walk into a bank, or similar high street institution, without fear of being ripped off?

ColdIron

Martin300 wrote: »

It seems as though my parents were fleeced by this unscrupulous salesman

Have you actually read any of the replies?

shop-to-drop

How did they pay the fee without knowing how much it was? Was it taken from profits? If so did they still make £500 after fees?

dunstonh

Please read this article to understand why I mentioned this information, particularly the part that says "the FCA said with more than half of the investments sold to people over 60".

theguardian.com/money/2013/sep/13/axa-fined-investment-isas-misselling

ahh. So, you appear to be looking for a complaint reason rather than actually having a complaint reason. Your problem is that the product sold to your parents was AXA Elevate. AXA Elevate is a whole of market platform offering 29,000 different investments. This is different to the article you link to which states that the complained about product didn't have a cautious option.

Just because the article mentioned over 60 does not mean it was wrong. The problem was the product offered in those cases did not offer a cautious investment option. So, people who were cautious were put in products above their risk profile. Retired people do generally tend to reduce their risk as they get into retirement. As AXA Elevate does offer a cautious option (as you would expect from 29,000 different investments), that doesnt apply. Also, in that case, AXA had to write to anyone that they felt was potentially affected by it.

You still havent mentioned the investment fund(s) used. That is the key thing here. Were the investment funds inappropriate for a 66 year old?

It would also be useful to know if they had the capacity for loss. That is a key driver in complaints. e.g. a 70 year old investing £20k in investments whilst having say £50k in bank savings is low risk (obviously depending on the fund as well). However, if they had £5k in cash savings then it is higher risk. The cash amount dilutes the risk.

Martin300

It appears that the only thing most of the people replying are taking away from this is that I mentioned that my mother was 66. Again, can I refer these people to the article "FCA fines Axa £1.8m over Isa mis-selling" in the Guardian. Please do a web search on this and read the part that says "the FCA said with more than half of the investments sold to people over 60, the levels of risk were unacceptably high."

You will then understand why this information is relevant.

dunstonh

Again, can I refer these people to the article "FCA fines Axa £1.8m over Isa mis-selling" in the Guardian.

Again, can I point you to the fact you are talking about a different product to what your parents had. And the fact AXA contacted those affected by that other product.

You will then understand why this information is relevant.

Hopefully, now you will realise why it is not relevant.

Why are you not telling us what your parents had invested in?

How about we look at an ombudsman decision on a similar case and age :
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=10135

It isnt about age. It is about capacity for loss and investments matching the risk profile.

comeandgo

I don't think they have been fleeced. You seem to be concentrating on the fee charged not the fact they got £500 interest which seems, while not great about average.

Martin300

dunstonh wrote: »

ahh. So, you appear to be looking for a complaint reason rather than actually having a complaint reason.

Actually, my dad had the complaint, and I did a bit of research and found this article. When someone has a complaint it's always good to do some research to see if there's any grounds for complaint, and I feel there is.

I will have to sit down with my father and find out what information we have to support our complaint.

Martin300

comeandgo wrote: »

I don't think they have been fleeced. You seem to be concentrating on the fee charged not the fact they got £500 interest which seems, while not great about average.

Which leaves the original investment amount at a £120 deficit.