Scottish Friendly Scottish Bond

Zanderman

DiggerUK said:

The rest of your post is 'plus le waffle'..._

You did insist on an explanation.

DiggerUK

It is quite sad when the fine art of précis in an explanation becomes
pontification..._

bowlhead99

DiggerUK said:

It is quite sad when the fine art of précis in an explanation becomes
pontification..._

As a précis:

- The OP asked whether it was usual for the exit value to be so different from an estimate some weeks earlier;

- The responders said that it wasn't unusual given market conditions, and an IFA on the thread pointed out that the figure from some weeks earlier was not an estimate but a projection which had to use some specific assumptions, so the number can change;

- You didn't comprehend the IFA's answer about the estimate received, so you offered an alternative, that you shouldn't take anything at face value.  Though this doesn't do anything to help the OP understand why the two numbers they got a few weeks apart were different or whether it was unusual, which is why they had started the thread;

- After follow-up, it turned out that you meant they should not have bought the product from a salesperson ten years earlier, and then they wouldn't need to be asking questions about recent valuations vs exit value. Though this still doesn't do anything to help the OP understand why the two numbers they got a few weeks apart were different or whether it was unusual, which is why they had started the thread. 

So you seem to have offered no real help or explanation to the OP while accusing others of doing too much waffling..._

dunstonh

- After follow-up, it turned out that you meant they should not have bought the product from a salesperson ten years earlier, and then they wouldn't need to be asking questions about recent valuations vs exit value. Though this still doesn't do anything to help the OP understand why the two numbers they got a few weeks apart were different or whether it was unusual, which is why they had started the thread. 

As it happens, the product in question is marketed via its website and various direct to client marketing.   No "salesperson" involved. 

And Digger:

What I am constantly asking,  is that no-one should accept testimonials from somebody with a pecuniary interest in a product they are selling.

And who on this thread are you referring to as I can't see any match to anyone offering a testimonial or someone with a pecuniary interest in it.

I am also a big fan of plain English 'sans le waffle'..._

And also a fan of talking complete BS.  You may wish to practise what you preach.

DiggerUK

It's précis Jim..._

bowlhead99

dunstonh said:

- After follow-up, it turned out that you meant they should not have bought the product from a salesperson ten years earlier, and then they wouldn't need to be asking questions about recent valuations vs exit value. Though this still doesn't do anything to help the OP understand why the two numbers they got a few weeks apart were different or whether it was unusual, which is why they had started the thread. 

As it happens, the product in question is marketed via its website and various direct to client marketing.   No "salesperson" involved.  

Noted, but ultimately the website sales engine and d2c marketing is created by those with an interest in selling products, i.e. salespeople, even if we don't literally mean a door to door salesman. I didn't want to stop to add qualifiers, because I know Digger is a fan of brevity and a short précis, over more comprehensive narrative. 

DiggerUK

I love the smell of comprehensive narrative in the morning..._

ginnie20

dunstonh said:

They should have paid this money to me 3 months ago and it feels as if they are being deliberately obstructive to not honour the payment.

You don't think it is more likely that they have closed their call centre due to coronavirus and are working on a skeleton staff?

Is it possible to refer to them to an authority?

No. That is not how it works.

Do I have to write a complaint to SF or elsewhere?

You write a complaint to SF.

My policy ended before the UK lockdown so they can't use corona as the excuse that there was no final summary and no final cheque. If you look on other  blogs, there are many other cases like this. I think they're in trouble.