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!
Friends Life: must be computer error?
Options
Comments
-
I did not actually say I wanted more expensive staffing, just staffing who were free to use their brains for the benefit of creating better informed customers.
I don't think you have any idea how much it costs Aviva in staffing costs to deal with complainants like me, and others who have to contact them several times to get the most simple queries sorted. I am sure you do understand the concept of bad service creating a vicious circle of complaining which costs far more than a little extra invested in original planned service levels.
On the question of total funds under management, I thank you for providing an estimate of remaining mostly "historical"with profits funds within the total.
One might ask why Aviva chooses not to offer any significant new with-profits products?
Might it be because it and the markets generally and you too dunstonh, have been successful in promoting it as old hat?
Might it also be that they pushed it as far as they dare and now they wish to let time heal the upset created when they started helping themselves to what was in the with-profits funds?
Meantime, unit-linked investments are far easier to be transparent about because they go down as well as up and very little else needs to be disclosed about why they go down or up - unknown deniable associates in the City and elsewhere can see to that. Totally independent of fund management business of course. Backscratching and shoulder-rubbing will iron out any unfortunate wrinkles that may occasionally surface.
With-profits is more problematic to explain of course, especially if you have had both hands in the pie for many years.
How much of that £43bn with-profits pie is earmarked for shareholders? Do we know that? Do we even know if the £43bn figure is correct or if it it is in fact some secretly concocted "fair value" figure? Now that IS market sensitive of course but thank goodness for the US SEC who cause some trail of clues to be in the public domain - that link was for AXA of course - remember them? Aviva/FL would rather you didn't
More recently, AXA's "assets under management" as at 31 December 2009 (not "funds under management", but where does the border between the two begin to blur?) were reported as over 1000 billion Euros. Maybe they "managed" a lot of paperclips and biros in stock in their very expensive offices stuffed with Picassos perhaps? I wonder where the paperclips and biros are now?
Anyway, the Guardian reminds us that the Friends Life acquisition may have added another £70bn to the total you found on their website, or perhaps your figure was pension funds only?
Who really knows the true figures for with-profits? Do we reckon Claire Spottiswoode ever got close to the right numbers at Aviva in 2007-9?
You say 1/5th because thats what Aviva let you believe, but how do they actually account for WP? If it is anything like that AXA example (which became Friends Life - or did it?) then maybe it requires around 60 special footnotes in the SEC filings to explain.
I particularly love this bit for the US regulatory audience 10 years ago which I am sure some might simply call historical rather than hysterical :rotfl: :Our French GAAP results may differ significantly from our U.S. GAAP results*(my bold)
The Company’s primary financial statements are in French GAAP until December 31, 2004, after which the Company will report its financial statements according to IFRS. For purposes of its listing on the NYSE, the Company reconciles its French GAAP annual financial results to U.S. GAAP each year. There are significant differences between French GAAP and U.S. GAAP which lead to different results under the two systems of accounting. Differences in AXA’s consolidated French GAAP and U.S. GAAP results have been significant over the last several years. In 2004, the most significant differences related primarily to differing rules with respect to treatment of goodwill, impairments for “other-than-temporary” declines in the value of fixed maturity and equity securities, recoverability of deferred tax assets, valuation of holdings in mutual funds, the accounting for derivatives instruments in hedging activities and the accounting for UK “With-Profits” contracts*0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards