Advisors who keep fees secret

bowlhead99

Pincher wrote: »

Hookers in a Five Star resort in the Cayman Islands doesn't get listed on the bill.

Correct. Any such marketing and training expenses or staff entertainment costs should just get built into the hourly rate or the annual percentage charge or whatever.

I'm quite happy for the advisor and his suppliers to do whatever they like with the money I pay them, as long as the quality of work and overall results are OK compared to the alternatives. I don't actually use an IFA but it's the same principle as for accountants, solicitors or other professional advisers. Or roofers, mechanics etc.

Gadfium

bigfreddiel wrote: »

In reality we're all the same.

We all have an income, we all fall into various age groups, we all have a family of sorts, we all have some debt, we all live somewhere, and some of us will live long enough to retire.

So we can all be categorised into a few similar types and so a plan can be easily created to suit those types needs for retirement.

https://youtu.be/jVygqjyS4CA

TheTracker

dunstonh wrote: »

IFAs account for under 1% of complaints at FOS and the majority are rejected.

The FSA and FOS have in turn complained about this statistic being used in this way by IFAs. Why? The FOS deals with a wide range of services that aren't offered by IFAs., eg PPI, current accounts, credit cards. The percentage of complaints that deal with IFAs are largely meaningless when used as reference to performance. I think I learnt that basic logical math in 2nd or 3rd grade.

Much more relevant, therefore, is that as of a couple of months ago and sourced from the FOS

• 13% of investment complaints regarded IFAs.
• 20% of pension complaints are over IFAs.

colsten

TheTracker wrote: »

Much more relevant, therefore, is that as of a couple of months ago and sourced from the FOS

• 13% of investment complaints regarded IFAs.
• 20% of pension complaints are over IFAs.

How man of these upheld?

dunstonh

The FSA and FOS have in turn complained about this statistic being used in this way by IFAs.

The food standards agency have not said a thing. Nor the have the FCA or FOS.

Natalie Ceeney (FOS chief executive) told the Treasury Select Committee "that while IFAs accounted for just 1% of complaints handled by the FOS, they won more cases than they lost. This is a good way to measure the work IFAs do to investigate the complaints they receive, she added.
Ceeney attributed the better results in complaints handling for IFAs to their desire to do their job thoroughly as they take the matter personally because of being small businesses and valuing their clients."

Much more relevant, therefore, is that as of a couple of months ago and sourced from the FOS
13% of investment complaints regarded IFAs.
20% of pension complaints are over IFAs.

Just 2875 complaints were against IFAs for 2014/15. 39% was the average uphold rate (compared to 55% as an overall average for all areas).

IFAs handle over 70% of pension business but get just 20% of pension complaints.

TheTracker

dunstonh wrote: »

The food standards agency have not said a thing. Nor the have the FCA or FOS.

Wrong. The FSA (predecessor of the FCA) published ...

FSA dispels 'myth' over IFA complaints

"Mythbusting. The significance of complaints. Some IFAs argue that, because only 2% of complaints [in 2010/11] that go to the Financial Ombudsman Service (the ombudsman service) are levelled against IFAs, the independent sector provides a better service than the banks. The total figure for complaints referred to the ombudsman service includes complaints about services and products such as banking and credit, which are not provided by IFAs, so the comparison is not a fair one. The more relevant data to use relates to products and services provided by both IFAs and banks, such as investments and pensions."

That statement was made a few years ago but it just as valid today.

My complaint to you is you shouldn't keep quoting this 1% number. It's irrelevant and misleading. Just 4% of new complaints are about pensions and investments and IFA complaints make up a significant element of those 4% of complaints.

If PPI complaints drop to zero next year I doubt you'll be saying that IFA complaints make up 5% of the complaints to the FOS vs 1% the previous year. It's a nonsense statistic. And if *every* complaint in the investments and pensions sphere were about IFAs its only 4%. Nonsense statistics. Whether the % is 0.1% or 10% it tells you next to nothing.

Instead, drop the 1% and please keep it specific like you did with this one (which I haven't checked for accuracy, but 70% of pension business - really?):

dunstonh wrote: »

IFAs handle over 70% of pension business but get just 20% of pension complaints.

bigfreddiel

masonic wrote: »

Everyone should be investing only in Vanguard Lifestrategy or similar through the cheapest available DIY platform. Anyone who gets told any different by an IFA or anyone else is being missold or ripped off. Have I got that about right?

I agree, I guess IFAs never recommend these type of funds or ETFs.

Just like they never recommended investment trusts when they were earning commission by selling products that gave them a nice kickback.

Cheers fj

Aegis

bigfreddiel wrote: »

I agree, I guess IFAs never recommend these type of funds or ETFs.

Actually you guess wrong

colsten

TheTracker, if you still read this thread, would you have an answer to this Q I asked earlier in response to a post from you, please?

colsten wrote: »

How man of these upheld?

As number/percentages of complaints are pretty meaningless without knowing how justified or otherwise the complaints were judged to be.

bigadaj

Well 98% of quoted statistics involve some form of inaccuracy or manipulation, or at the very least some form of selective bias.