Financial adviser retiring - Would like to manage money directly now

1234John

Hi 
My financial advisers is retiring and the company is being shut down.
A larger company has been recommended and the paper work is in front of me, to transfer ownership (fee payments/advisory capacity) to the new company.
My money is in 3 pots, I have spoken directly to all 3 pots and have determined I can deal directly with two pots (no need for an adviser or his fees).
The third pot dose not deal directly (in the current model) with the general public so i have 3 options with this pot of money (i think)...
1. Ask for the money back. I am not sure if there are any extraction fees and who is liable for these. The agreement has been stopped by my  financial  adviser, not me.
2. Use the new company to manage this pot of money. At this stage I have been told they will manage all (all 3 pots) or nothing... I assume this is untrue and just a sales tactic??
3. Leave the money where it is (un-managed), far from ideal and a bit of a mess.
I wounder if anyone can answers these questions?
1. Is it the duty of my retiring  financial  adviser to return the money back to me (the third pot) if I do not wish to go with the new company he has recommended? Also would he have to pick up any extraction fees as he has ceased the agreement?
2. Can I extract the money directly if relations break down? Or is he in charge of my money acting as a proxy?
3. Are financial advisers (in general) happy to manage part of an investment portfolio, not all? Surely they are receiving commission either way?

Thanks in anticipation and I feel silly asking all these questions. Since I instructed my financial advisers to look after my money some years ago I have learnt a lot!! So happy to manage the bulk of my money directly now.

SonOf

1. Ask for the money back. I am not sure if there are any extraction fees and who is liable for these. The agreement has been stopped by my  financial  adviser, not me.
The adviser will have no fees but product providers have their own fees and terms and are not affected by the adviser.
2. Use the new company to manage this pot of money. At this stage I have been told they will manage all (all 3 pots) or nothing... I assume this is untrue and just a sales tactic??
Is the new company an IFA or FA?   
It wont be a sales tactic.   We have a client who we are ending services with shortly as he mixed his pots up and it made it very difficult to give advice when you dont know who is using the ISA allowance, SIPP allowance, CGT allowances etc.   We would have had to handicap the process because of investment decisions that we had no control over.    On several times in recent years, decisions have been made by the client that were just wrong but it was in an area that we did not have control over.   
3. Leave the money where it is (un-managed), far from ideal and a bit of a mess.
Not a good idea. Either you DIY or you use an IFA (not an FA).   Leaving it to its own devices is not a good option.

1. Is it the duty of my retiring  financial  adviser to return the money back to me (the third pot) if I do not wish to go with the new company he has recommended? Also would he have to pick up any extraction fees as he has ceased the agreement?
No.  You are not invested in the financial adviser own product.  You will be with a product provider.  If the adviser calls it a day, your money remains invested where it is.   Terms will be applied as published by the provider.  Very few have exit fees nowadays.
2. Can I extract the money directly if relations break down? Or is he in charge of my money acting as a proxy?
Again, you are not invested in the adviser.  You are invested with a product provider/platform.  The adviser has no impact on the product/platform terms
3. Are financial advisers (in general) happy to manage part of an investment portfolio, not all? Surely they are receiving commission either way?
It will depend on the extent of the mix and match.  If you are restrict an adviser to only control of some of your tax wrappers but not all then it can create conflicts in the advice.  If you want to run your own GIA but not the ISA/pension then not so much an issue.   It really depends on the amounts involved and the level of conflict it may or may not product.
BTW, there is no commission on investments since the end of 2012 on unit trust/OEICs on platforms (in some cases , if it was arranged before then, then insurance bonds (onshore or offshore) and some personal pensions could still pay commission if there was any).

1234John

Thanks for the advise, appreciated!! 
It makes good sense, a holistic view is needed to maximise tax breaks.
I would prefer a financial adviser that i pay by the hour (no adviser fees), who can just review my portfolio once a year!! Any recommendations?

SonOf

1234John said:

Thanks for the advise, appreciated!! 
It makes good sense, a holistic view is needed to maximise tax breaks.
I would prefer a financial adviser that i pay by the hour (no adviser fees), who can just review my portfolio once a year!! Any recommendations?

Hourly rates are unusual as most people do not like them and it what you are after is VATable.    It is not VAT where there is an intention to buy a product (even if it doesnt follow through) but is VATable if there is no intention to buy a product.   A portfolio review like that would probably be VATable.   Whereas an adviser proposition that says they will use ISA allowances (so "buying" an ISA - even if it doesn't happen) along with a package of other things is non VATable.  
The other issue is that what you would be doing is transactional advice.  It would be reactive rather than proactive.  So, if something happened in between the dates that needed to alter the portfolio urgently, you would not be contacted as you do not have their ongoing service.

There are probably advisers out that they could do it that way but it would take a lot of looking to find them and it probably wouldn't result in much difference in fees to having the normal ongoing servicing.        As long as the ongoing adviser charge is reasonable then it shouldn't make much difference if its hourly or percentage or fixed fee.

1234John

Thanks again. I am confident enough to monitor my investments on a yearly/monthly basis and determine if they are performing. What I am not aware of is all the products on the market. Hence why a yearly or ad-hoc review (when I have highlighted a product is under performing) would be my preference... In time I would hope that I learn enough to negate the need for any help!! I am in a DIY transition period!!  :-)

xylophone

I have spoken directly to all 3 pots 

I've heard of talking to the animals and even to plants but ..........

SonOf

 I am confident enough to monitor my investments on a yearly/monthly basis and determine if they are performing.
Performance is just one bit of it.   Suitability, due diligence and risk are the other issues.   For example, we get a monthly governance report on investments that may pull funds for a reason.   Sometimes there are special bulletins on things that cannot wait.    Whenever we get a bulletin that turns a fund to a "sell" rating, we check who is on our ongoing servicing list and who has that fund and go to them to discuss the changes that need to be made.     Two relatively recent removals involved funds that have been performing very well but have issues coming up.   Waiting for the fund to drop off in performance may be too late.   So, you cant just wait until performance drops off.  

1234John

Ok, out of interest, if I did not want a financial adviser where is the best place to put 100K at the moment, low risk, limited hassle (DIYable) !! :-)

SonOf

Is the size of your total investments £100k?  (if so, then hourly would be more expensive).
What taxwrappers would you be using?
What assets would you be investing in within those tax wrappers?
What is your definition of low risk?
What features/functionality would you be after?

1234John

Is the size of your total investments £100k?  (if so, then hourly would be more expensive). 
Yes, it costs approx 600 in fees at present.

What taxwrappers would you be using?
Tax is not really a concern as I simple have a state pension and the 100K, so I will be hard pushed to hit my tax allowance.
What assets would you be investing in within those tax wrappers?
As above.
What is your definition of low risk?
A poor interest rate in a savings account = Low / Putting money on the stock market and not ever losing more than 10% of it would equal medium.
What features/functionality would you be after?
KISS = Keep It Simple Stu...

Thanks for the help!!!!!!

SonOf

Is the size of your total investments £100k?  (if so, then hourly would be more expensive). 
Yes, it costs approx 600 in fees at present.
For an IFA, that is a small portfolio.  The fees are actually not high for that amount and hourly could well be more expensive.  (just to give some context for your earlier comments)

Tax is not really a concern as I simple have a state pension and the 100K, so I will be hard pushed to hit my tax allowance.
When you invest, you hold it unwrapped or within tax wrappers.   Tax wrappers are part of the invesmtent process and you would be required to choose which wrappers (or unwrapped) you would be using if you DIY (just as the adviser does if advised)

What assets would you be investing in within those tax wrappers?
As above.
Assets means what investment types would you be using in the investments.  Shares, Unit Trusts, OEICs, ITs, ETFs etc?  It makes a difference as some providers focus their model on certain asset types and not others.

When you pick provider/platform, you do so on the basis of where you want to invest and how it works for you.  There is no one best provider that can fit all.