IFA Quote for Drawdown

dunstonh

Which part of the Money Marketing (trade paper for financial advisers) is also wrong about the existence of trail. I am no troll but the mis-information on here needs challenging.

The same money marketing that has reported on the sunset clause (turning off) for trail commission which does not apply to renewal commission or fund based renewal commission because neither of those are trail commission. Just because some people have merged terminology does not mean it is correct. Insurance/Assurance used together. Bonds that are not bonds. Doesnt make it right.

am afraid you either do not understand the financial products from the 1980's onward or you listen too much to the network propaganda put out by your marketing team and repeat it on here to members of the public

So, please enlighten us with your wisdom. How do you explain fund based renewal commission or renewal commission (or trail commission as you call it) continuing to be paid when trail commission ends in April 2016. If those were trail commissions then surely they would be turned off when trail commission ends. Or perhaps its because they are not trail commission but fund based renewal commission or renewal commission.

zagfles

Your_Hero wrote: »

I think we all know your agenda here.

Must be tough walking around with a chip on your shoulder the whole time and bashing IFAs online, as evident in every post of yours.

Same with zagfles - he has a dig every time he gets half a chance. Well done. :T I'm sure this will give you extreme satisfaction. Now, move on.

Yeah, definitely some agendas going on here Personally I have no vested interest in whether people use IFAs or not. What I do have an issue with is constant misinformation about popular DIY options being "expensive". Or disingenuous attempts to compare eg the best IFA charges with the worst DIY.

addedvaluebob

Your_Hero wrote: »

I think we all know your agenda here.

Must be tough walking around with a chip on your shoulder the whole time and bashing IFAs online, as evident in every post of yours.

Same with zagfles - he has a dig every time he gets half a chance. Well done. :T I'm sure this will give you extreme satisfaction. Now, move on.

You know nothing about me or any suggested agenda.

My only gripe is that the financial adviser community on here keeps telling people that they don't have grounds for any complaint, everything is fine to charge a lot of money for not so much.

This is a free to post discussion forum, if you have nothing to add then don't post it's a personal choice

Nosler

Your_Hero wrote: »

I think we all know your agenda here.

Must be tough walking around with a chip on your shoulder the whole time and bashing IFAs online, as evident in every post of yours.

Same with zagfles - he has a dig every time he gets half a chance. Well done. :T I'm sure this will give you extreme satisfaction. Now, move on.

You must admit that when an IFA try's to charge £5k for starting a pension and then gives investment options that would cost another £8k a year it's very easy to "have a dig" at the IFA community?

atush

addedvaluebob wrote: »

You know nothing about me or any suggested agenda.

My only gripe is that the financial adviser community on here keeps telling people that they don't have grounds for any complaint, everything is fine to charge a lot of money for not so much.

This is a free to post discussion forum, if you have nothing to add then don't post it's a personal choice

What you fail to understand is that most here like me aren't part of the "financial adviser community" but are in fact DIY investors. Who are still annoyed by your agenda.

dunstonh

You must admit that when an IFA try's to charge £5k for starting a pension and then gives investment options that would cost another £8k a year it's very easy to "have a dig" at the IFA community?

Harold Shipman was a murderer. So, using your method, that makes all doctors murderers.

My only gripe is that the financial adviser community on here keeps telling people that they don't have grounds for any complaint, everything is fine to charge a lot of money for not so much.

Whilst you continue to invent stories to suit your agenda. The advisers on here tell people when something is wrong or expensive (look at the early posts on this thread which say it is too much). They also tell them when it is reasonable and where there are no issues.

At least the advisers on this board are honest and upfront about their position when they post. Unlike you. If you put a disclosure about what you did, I doubt many would have a nice word to say about you. Your support of PPI claims companies is ridiculous at times. But that suits your agenda and background.

zagfles

dunstonh wrote: »

Whilst you continue to invent stories to suit your agenda. The advisers on here tell people when something is wrong or expensive (look at the early posts on this thread which say it is too much). They also tell them when it is reasonable and where there are no issues.

Indeed. And over the years, there've been probably hundreds of threads where people have posted their IFA's charges, and in most cases you've told them the charges are too high, even that the IFA is greedy, etc. You know that there are IFAs out there who charge much more than you consider reasonable.

Yet when it come to generic advice, such as in this concurrent thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5122335

you say things like

Whilst DIY does not have an adviser charge, the HL charges are higher than what the IFA would arrange

Not "can be" or "usually", but just "are". At the same time as posting in this thread, where it's blatently obvious that the IFA's chosen platform/funds have much higher charges than typical HL charges!

dunstonh

Yet when it come to generic advice, such as in this concurrent thread http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=5122335

you say things like
Quote:
Whilst DIY does not have an adviser charge, the HL charges are higher than what the IFA would arrange
Not "can be" or "usually", but just "are". At the same time as posting in this thread, where it's blatently obvious that the IFA's chosen platform/funds have much higher charges than typical HL charges!

Funds are a matter of opinion and the charges are virtually the same across the board. So, you can eliminate them. Platform charges do vary in both the DIY world and adviser world. However, the IFA can arrange cheaper then HL. There are also DIY options cheaper than HL.

zagfles

dunstonh wrote: »

Funds are a matter of opinion and the charges are virtually the same across the board. So, you can eliminate them. Platform charges do vary in both the DIY world and adviser world. However, the IFA can arrange cheaper then HL. There are also DIY options cheaper than HL.

Quite right, and HL can be cheaper than IFA arrangements even before adding the advice fee (this thread being a case in point). So generic assertions about which way is cheaper are wrong.

Nosler

dunstonh wrote: »

Harold Shipman was a murderer. So, using your method, that makes all doctors murderers.

No one is saying all IFAs are bad. But whenever someone comes here and posts a "I went to an IFA and they wanted to charge me xx%" type post the charges are horrendous.


Maybe people only come here with such posts when the fees are high, or maybe all IFAs are offering advice that costs an extortionate amount?