Stocks & Shares ISAs

dunstonh

It's now absolutely clear that I wasn't properly advised at the time.

Certainly not clear from here.

had no experience of financial investment and turned to the long-established Co-op FIS - that I thought the best way forward. "If I'd known a bit more" doesn't help - I didn't, and wasn't properly advised.

Nothing you have said suggests any wrongdoing. The normal pecking order for mainstream is ISA followed by unwrapped UT. Exactly what you have.

They didn't, and they've left me in a position where I've no idea how long to keep the Shares ISAs in terms of my impending retirement versus potential unknown risks.

UTs are open ended. You hold them as long as you want and need them. If you want new advice then purchase that new advice.

I should never have been advised in this direction when they knew the purpose of the investment...

Why not? Nothing you have said suggests anything wrong.

Not to mention that I wasn't advised that at the time I would be "buying at high prices" only for the extreme fall that followed to almost wipe out my investment within months of their experienced expert advice.

That is not a required risk warning. It wouldnt be a sensible one if it was. Also, they would not have been allowed to say that and even if they did, chances are they would have been wrong most of the time.

What I have learned is that I shouldn't trust their modern-day counter-parts now.

There isnt a modern day counterpart.

You keep going on, with largely pointless and irrelevant points. You appear to be looking for a complaint where there is none. You are almost certainly much better off than being in cash savings. So, what exactly are you looking for?

supersabw

The issue about not conveying to me that cashing in my "medium-risk" investment at ANY stage would require the purchase of more advice is not being addressed. I'm in the wrong forum, obviously, because the sharks still circle the self-confessed inexperienced prey. MSE stands for complete clarity of what is being paid for. I've seen nothing here to reassure me that there would be any greater clarity now.

Keep_pedalling

supersabw wrote: »

The issue about not conveying to me that cashing in my "medium-risk" investment at ANY stage would require the purchase of more advice is not being addressed. I'm in the wrong forum, obviously, because the sharks still circle the self-confessed inexperienced prey. MSE stands for complete clarity of what is being paid for. I've seen nothing here to reassure me that there would be any greater clarity now.

Now you are being paranoid, and seem to be suggesting that those of us who have responded to your posts are some kind of induststry sharks. I have nenever worked in the industry and am an individual investor such as yourselves, who just happens to also hold RLCIS ISA as you do. I have also held them for a similar period of time.

From that point of view I simply see your complaint as nonsense, but you are obviously just looking for someone to agree with your point of view, and who thinks you you should be showered with compo.

supersabw

I have never claimed "compo" in my life. It's assumptions like that (and the assumption that an interest in finance bestows a medical qualification to diagnose a mental illness such as paranoia) which discredit and devalue advice or overviews offered (if any). I want to see the financial industry more accountable with less undeserved mystique - clarity of what we're buying, proper earning of fees charged and what they are for - just as MSE does too. Thank you, have a good evening

Keep_pedalling

When anyone on MSE mentions miss selling, it is invariably associated with compensation for said miss selling.

If that is not what you want, then what exactly do you want from this?

Again I will add, that the best thing you can do in your uncertain state is to consult an IFA. Yes they will charge for their expertise, but all charges will be up front and clear, and they won't be steering you to products that earn them the greatest commission because they are not allowed to take commission on investment products.

dunstonh

The issue about not conveying to me that cashing in my "medium-risk" investment at ANY stage would require the purchase of more advice is not being addressed.

It is not a requirement for advice to either purchase investments or to sell them. It is a choice you make. Do you DIY or get someone to do it for you. Selling investments rarely requires advice for the average person as all it takes is a simple form or written request saying please sell the investments and pay me the proceeds.

I'm in the wrong forum, obviously, because the sharks still circle the self-confessed inexperienced prey.

Not sure about sharks but I am sure we can find some tin foil salesmen to help you put a hat together.

MSE stands for complete clarity of what is being paid for.

You are not paying for advice. So, what do you think MSE would say about you not getting a service that you have not employed someone to do and have not paid them to do?

I want to see the financial industry more accountable with less undeserved mystique - clarity of what we're buying, proper earning of fees charged and what they are for - just as MSE does too.

There is perfect clarity. If you employed them with an ongoing servicing basis you would have a contract or fee agreement. That agreement would state the charges and the services they have agreed to supply you.

The problem is that you are talking about a product purchase from 23 years ago using a process that no longer exists and trying to retrospectively apply modern standards to it. If you bought a TV in 1994, would you expect the shop to come out and repair it for you free of charge? Would you expect that same shop to still be there? Would you expect that tv to have automatically turned into a widescreen ultra HD tv?

I think you are being unreasonable. Both to the CIS and to those responding on this forum.

supersabw

to both contributors: If I'd been told there would be no further advice under that purchase, I wouldn't have purchased it. I wasn't. The point about buying advice at that difficult time was that I needed it due to not having the expertise myself, and wasn't told that none would be included beyond the initial purchase. And the point about people on MSE "invariably" chasing compensation - is an unfounded and incorrect generalisation due to assumptions about what people are actually "blowing out of proportion" - ie what they as individuals in varying circumstances are genuinely concerned about. My opinion on unreasonable counts as much as anyone else's. Good evening.

bowlhead99

Sorry, but the Financial Advisors of the time led me to buy a product which no doubt benefitted them, without explaining the risks relating to the lack of control over how great the risk of losing it completely

In the absence of figures and the fact you are describing it as medium risk, we can only assume the risk of gaining or losing was 'medium'. You say the value was 'almost wiped out' within months, without giving any figures (40% paper loss? or really a 95% loss 'almost wiping you out'?), but presumably now it is showing a healthy profit, which is to be expected as medium risk investments are designed to be held for the medium to long term rather than for a few months. I think it unlikely that there was any significant risk of 'losing it completely' but without knowing the exact investments or the extent of the valuation swings it is not possible to say.

Presumably it was not much of an issue to you that the value was 'almost wiped out' or you would not have continued to invite the Co-op man to your house to discuss your investments and try to sell you other things. You would have complained then, rather than waiting 20 years and getting on some sort of compensation culture missale bandwagon about something that happened decades ago.

or how or when to redeem it

The procedure for selling is same as it was 20 years ago - simply tell them you would like to sell because you would prefer to be holding cash than be holding a medium risk investment. They will sell it and give you the cash.

If you would like to keep the investment forever, and pass the ending value to the beneficiaries of your will, you can. If instead you would like to stop holding it and take cash instead so you can spend it, you can. The person through whom you bought the investment does not know what you would like to do. All they can do is tell you what it was worth at the last daily valuation point and let you decide if you would like to cash out all or some of the investment at the next available daily deadline.

If you find out Monday's price and decide at (say) 9am Tuesday that you would like to cash in the funds at the next valuation point of (say) 5pm Tuesday, they will take your instruction, value your shares along with everyone else's at 5pm Tuesday, and give you that amount of cash. i.e., the price for people buying in or selling out on Tuesday. At 9am Tuesday they don't know what the value of the fund will be at 5pm Tuesday, so they can't tell you, because it is a future event.

You can't have the price that they announced the shares were worth on Monday, because it is no longer Monday and you have chosen to stay invested in the fund overnight, and by Tuesday the funds are worth a different value, because things happened in the world since Monday when they last valued it. If you wanted to exit at Monday's valuation point you would need to give them some notice before Monday's valuation point has been and gone. Basically this means you can't decide after the market has moved up or down, that you liked the price before the market has moved, and buy or sell at that old outdated value. That's fair.

supersabw wrote: »

The issue about not conveying to me that cashing in my "medium-risk" investment at ANY stage would require the purchase of more advice is not being addressed.

Having bought an investment, you do not need to purchase advice to decide whether you should keep the investment. You can simply decide to keep it, or not to keep it, yourself.

How is someone supposed to know whether TODAY you would find it more useful and rewarding to have a medium risk investment, (which has generated gains over 20 years and could continue to generate gains over the next 20 years, with risk of ups and downs along the way) or instead have cash in your bank... without evaluating all your current circumstances, goals and needs?

They certainly can't tell that from a cursory examination of your circumstances two decades ago. If you would like to take advice about the best portfolio or financial planning for your needs NOW, you can pay for some advice NOW, from someone independent. Or you can decide you do not need advice, and just feel that on balance you would rather have cash than a medium risk investment, or perhaps would rather have a medium risk investment than the cash. No advice needs to be taken at all.

You originally told the 'advisor' (sales rep) that you would like a medium risk investment, so they arranged it for you (probably after discussing that higher and lower risk options were available). You kept it for the long term and it went up in value (we assume, because you haven't given figures, but it would be very surprising if it didn't).

But you can't expect someone running an investment fund to magically know on what date this century you would prefer to have cash than have the investment you own. You might never want to sell, because you might like to let someone inherit it from you when you die. Or you might want it at the beginning of retirement to pay off a mortgage and a car, or towards the end of retirement to pay for care home fees, or you might want to sell a little each year of retirement for extra spending money.

MSE stands for complete clarity of what is being paid for. I've seen nothing here to reassure me that there would be any greater clarity now.

Have you actually looked into the financial advice market for reassurance now? You have been told you can buy independent advice. Most of the independent financial advisors that post on this forum seem to have their heads screwed on, and there is little to suggest you would not get clarity on risks and options and the scope of the advice, if you sought advice when buying a product today.

You started by making the assertion that at the time there were less rules and obligations to make sure risks were understood. So, now, there are more, right? QED.

to both contributors: If I'd been told there would be no further advice under that purchase, I wouldn't have purchased it. I wasn't.

So, if you were told there was no further advice included in what you paid, you would not have bought. Were you told there would be further advice?

For example, were you told that every day for the next two decades someone would give you a call about your current financial situation and have a discussion about your needs and goals and aspirations as they changed over time, and as you got a bit closer to retirement they would one day say, "right, on the basis of how you have described your circumstances each day for the last 7000 days, I'm pleased to tell you that you have now reached the exact optimum point in your life to exit the investment - it is now time to sell this investment and take the cash, and those last 7000 telephone discussions were all free of charge".

That may sound flippant and it is. It is not a way that a firm could practically operate in delivering ongoing advice. So, what ongoing advice did they say they would give you and how did they say they would structure it?

The point about buying advice at that difficult time was that I needed it due to not having the expertise myself, and wasn't told that none would be included beyond the initial purchase

Right, you weren't told ongoing advice wasn't included, but you weren't told it would be included either. They were silent about ongoing advice. And you guessed wrong that they would give it you for free.

But the bottom line is that when you were 'vulnerable' at a 'difficult time', you bought a medium risk investment which after a couple of decades is showing a healthy profit. It has been a good thing, to own the medium risk investment, because investments have broadly performed quite well since the 90s (with some blips along the way). So, no mis-sale has occurred.

Now you are wondering who you can sue because you don't know whether you would be better off continuing to hold a medium risk investment or cash it in, and nobody is able to tell you what is the best thing for you to do. Sorry, you can't sue for something like that. If you would like professional advice on what to do next you can buy that advice, or if you don't want to buy it, you can toss a coin.

You say you would not have bought if you knew you wouldn't get 'cash it in' advice. So is what you are really looking for, for them to revert your financial position so that you get the returns of a cash ISA instead of the returns of the medium risk investment ISA all the way back to the 1990s? Perhaps if you complain and then ask nicely they will oblige.

Brand

Hi supersabw
You have 3 issues:
1. Commission you have paid for financial advice
2. delayed pricing on OEICs and unit trusts
3. general when to sell in the stockmarket

My view is:
1. yes CIS were tied advisers, sold only with a factfind, and you paid CIS a big initial charge which included commission and your annual management charge includes trail commission, so, unless there was something unusual about the RL takeover of the CIS fund business, you are still paying RL for advice and are entitled to advice from RL. Was it mentioned in a letter at the time?
2. delayed pricing - it is the same for all managed funds which you can't buy and sell instantly on the LSE. It is just one of those things I am afraid. Pricing is done on the basis of the value on the previous day.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-2046885/Market-volatility-making-difficult-investors-buy-sell-popular-investment-funds.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/funds/buying-or-selling-investment-funds-heres-why-you-should-only-do/


As for when to sell, I have made two suggestions on these matters: Firstly, as it is hard to time the market, sell chunks at a time, "drip out", just like it is hard to time the market when you buy, so "drip in".
Secondly, speed up your selling if the stockmarket price falls below (and stays below for a couple of weeks) the green line on the FTSE graph I put up. This idea was mentioned in the DTel by a money manager some years ago.
What to buy and when to sell is a specialist topic and for more on this you need to read on a specialist stockmarket website. Anyway, hopefully RL will give you their best advice on the this.

Brand

Further to the above, I can't see why RL would not offer you advice, as they'd see you as a customer.
The question is whether tied advice anyway is worth having. My guess is that their advice would be do you need some cash quickly; if so, sell some units. Otherwise, the stockmarket is going up, so why not hang on longer, and, to diversify, why not transfer some of your pot into this other RL fund, and don't forget this year's ISA allowance.
If you think the advice is not great, then transfer the ISA (don't close it) to somewhere else with a better variety of funds and a less partial advisory service.