Charles Stanley - Aggressively Pursing Customers

Sebo027

Good evening,

At the request of a relative I had been going through their investment paper work and sifted through the usual statements, brochures etc from a number of investment platforms (Aegon, Hargreaves Lansdown, Schroders) but then I came across numerous transfer forms from Charles Stanley. My relatives details were already pre-populated and the "signature box" was nicely highlighted in pink to "guide" them even further through the process. Upon discussion it transpires they have also called and said that they were waiting on the paper work to complete the transfer. They were not requested to do so, and there are numerous letters, transfer forms, brochures etc trying to transfer the holding. 

If i remember correctly they were supposedly merging with Aegon or CoFunds? That holding was previously transferred but now it's seems they are doing a u-turn. Either way, it seems a bit desperate and unscrupulous. 

Posting to see if anyone else has received anything similar. 

wizzards

I have not heard anything particularly bad about Charles Stanley.  However if the adviser is getting commision on the transfer there is always some incentive.  It's not unusual for financial advisors to assist in form completion.  Its very hard to draw a conclusion from above without hard facts.  I assume the relative in question is alive so you can without presumption ask them that you noticed these forms and see what they say.  Your information above suggests in part that you have had this discussion.

Its very easy to conclude that some kind of "hard sell" may have been ongoing but on the other hand it may all be perfectly explainable.   If the relative says they were "not requested to do so" ?  then how does Charles Stanley have details etc in the first place.  At some point "said relative" must have divulged info to Charles Stanley.   Without knowing when and how this was done its very hard to conclude "it seems a bit desperate and unscrupulous".  
In these cases the only way is to make a diary of events if the relative can remember them.  But it depends what you aim to achieve ?  Do you want to report Charles Stanley for unscrupulous practices.  If so you would need documented evidence with "Clear dates, times and factual evidence of wrong doing".

Sebo027

My relative previously held money with Charles Stanley. I will need to go through the letters to find the details but I remember that holding being transferred to Aegon or CoFunds, which is where it's currently held. After that the letters from Charles Stanley started, so they have details historically. 

I won't plan on following through with a complaint or a report but receiving a set of pre-populated transfer forms every quarter, that are continuously going unanswered for well over a year, seems unusual, and as I have said, desperate. 

I will call Charles Stanley and ask them to stop.  

Malthusian

(Posted before seeing post #3)

Charles Stanley is a reputable outfit albeit a tied and probably expensive one. Pre-filling forms for clients and calling to check whether they still want to proceed is perfectly normal. People have posted threads on MSE complaining because their adviser didn't bother to ring them to chase up a previous meeting.

Is it possible your relative is confused and has forgotten about their previous contact with Charles Stanley? It is understandable that someone who asks their relative to look through their paperwork may not have total recall.

Do you have Lasting Power of Attorney for your relative? If so you could just ring the number on the paperwork and ask them where the contact came from. If not, the fact that they are asking you to look at their finances suggests it would be a good idea.

Malthusian

I won't plan on following through with a complaint or a report but receiving a set of pre-populated transfer forms every quarter, that are continuously going unanswered for well over a year, seems unusual, and as I have said, desperate.

Now that we've been allowed that new information, I agree it sounds unusual and desperate. Ringing the client after a few months to try and rekindle the contact, and then sending new forms if the client says "Sorry, I forgot, could you send it again", sure. Sending them a fresh set of paperwork every few months (at least four times in total) without trying to first establish whether the client still wanted to proceed, if that's what they did, does sound a bit desperate. Smacks of hoping they'll just sign and return the forms to get rid of them.

Sebo027

Now that we've been allowed that new information, I agree it sounds unusual and desperate. Ringing the client after a few months to try and rekindle the contact, and then sending new forms if the client says "Sorry, I forgot, could you send it again", sure. Sending them a fresh set of paperwork every few months (at least four times in total) without trying to first establish whether the client still wanted to proceed, if that's what they did, does sound a bit desperate. Smacks of hoping they'll just sign and return the forms to get rid of them.

My thoughts exactly. 

Had it been a requested transfer I would welcome a pre-populated form to "grease the wheels" so to speak. And as for my relative requesting this and me being unaware, not impossible but very unlikely. My relative takes a hands off approach to investing and all correspondence of this nature is processed by myself and has been for years. 

wizzards

Sebo027 said:

Now that we've been allowed that new information, I agree it sounds unusual and desperate. Ringing the client after a few months to try and rekindle the contact, and then sending new forms if the client says "Sorry, I forgot, could you send it again", sure. Sending them a fresh set of paperwork every few months (at least four times in total) without trying to first establish whether the client still wanted to proceed, if that's what they did, does sound a bit desperate. Smacks of hoping they'll just sign and return the forms to get rid of them.

My thoughts exactly. 

Had it been a requested transfer I would welcome a pre-populated form to "grease the wheels" so to speak. And as for my relative requesting this and me being unaware, not impossible but very unlikely. My relative takes a hands off approach to investing and all correspondence of this nature is processed by myself and has been for years. 

If you are "unaware" and you are looking after this person's affairs as a friend or relative then you as responsible person need to "become aware" and should be checking and receiving all correspondence and having a regular meeting with your relative who is effectively your client.  Otherwise there is the possibility for problems as you are experiencing.  You cannot really blame Charles Stanley for this.  There are many sharks and genuine companies out there.

If they are constantly ringing your client and pressuring them then that's a different matter.  If they have manually hand written the application form 4 times and sent it then I would find that strange.  If its a pre-printed form and they highlight the signature box its more than likely some admin person is just sending them out.  If they are not an existing client of Charles Stanley then you can politely tell them you no longer want to receive marketing from them and they should stop.  There is no law against sending pre-filled forms to assist clients.  To have a pre-filled form the client must have shown a basic interest in this transaction otherwise why would it have all their personal details such as name and address and funds and also their phone number.

cattie

Cofunds & Aegon are platforms upon which an IFA would use to keep a clients investment funds all under one roof so to speak.  My own IFA used Cofunds, which I had to sign to agree to my funds being 'parked' on that platform, & more recently, Cofunds was absorbed by Aegon, so again a client would need to acknowlege the change & also probably set up new sign in details to be able to use the online service, which is what I had to do.

Having a clients details pre printed on forms is a help in such a situation & definitely not a hard sell.

Sebo027

wizzards said:

Sebo027 said:

Now that we've been allowed that new information, I agree it sounds unusual and desperate. Ringing the client after a few months to try and rekindle the contact, and then sending new forms if the client says "Sorry, I forgot, could you send it again", sure. Sending them a fresh set of paperwork every few months (at least four times in total) without trying to first establish whether the client still wanted to proceed, if that's what they did, does sound a bit desperate. Smacks of hoping they'll just sign and return the forms to get rid of them.

My thoughts exactly. 

Had it been a requested transfer I would welcome a pre-populated form to "grease the wheels" so to speak. And as for my relative requesting this and me being unaware, not impossible but very unlikely. My relative takes a hands off approach to investing and all correspondence of this nature is processed by myself and has been for years. 

If you are "unaware" and you are looking after this person's affairs as a friend or relative then you as responsible person need to "become aware" and should be checking and receiving all correspondence and having a regular meeting with your relative who is effectively your client.  Otherwise there is the possibility for problems as you are experiencing.  You cannot really blame Charles Stanley for this.  There are many sharks and genuine companies out there.

If they are constantly ringing your client and pressuring them then that's a different matter.  If they have manually hand written the application form 4 times and sent it then I would find that strange.  If its a pre-printed form and they highlight the signature box its more than likely some admin person is just sending them out.  If they are not an existing client of Charles Stanley then you can politely tell them you no longer want to receive marketing from them and they should stop.  There is no law against sending pre-filled forms to assist clients.  To have a pre-filled form the client must have shown a basic interest in this transaction otherwise why would it have all their personal details such as name and address and funds and also their phone number.

I have told you why Charles Stanley have their details, they were previously a customer. As for "being unaware" I said it's not impossible but very unlikely as I do monitor all mail and all correspondence  but I am not with my relative 100% of the time. I know that I have not sent any documentation off on behalf of my relative to Charles Stanley and nor has my relative. It seems you are inferring my being somewhat negligent is causing this "problem" - my relative is no longer a client of Charles Stanley and yet they are persistent in trying to poach back business over a sustained period of time. 

Edit to add: I concede I have not contacted them explicitly to ask them to stop, and I am sure they will following that request. Irrespective, I am of the opinion they have been too persistent in this case. 

wizzards

Sebo027 said:

wizzards said:

Sebo027 said:

Now that we've been allowed that new information, I agree it sounds unusual and desperate. Ringing the client after a few months to try and rekindle the contact, and then sending new forms if the client says "Sorry, I forgot, could you send it again", sure. Sending them a fresh set of paperwork every few months (at least four times in total) without trying to first establish whether the client still wanted to proceed, if that's what they did, does sound a bit desperate. Smacks of hoping they'll just sign and return the forms to get rid of them.

My thoughts exactly. 

Had it been a requested transfer I would welcome a pre-populated form to "grease the wheels" so to speak. And as for my relative requesting this and me being unaware, not impossible but very unlikely. My relative takes a hands off approach to investing and all correspondence of this nature is processed by myself and has been for years. 

If you are "unaware" and you are looking after this person's affairs as a friend or relative then you as responsible person need to "become aware" and should be checking and receiving all correspondence and having a regular meeting with your relative who is effectively your client.  Otherwise there is the possibility for problems as you are experiencing.  You cannot really blame Charles Stanley for this.  There are many sharks and genuine companies out there.

If they are constantly ringing your client and pressuring them then that's a different matter.  If they have manually hand written the application form 4 times and sent it then I would find that strange.  If its a pre-printed form and they highlight the signature box its more than likely some admin person is just sending them out.  If they are not an existing client of Charles Stanley then you can politely tell them you no longer want to receive marketing from them and they should stop.  There is no law against sending pre-filled forms to assist clients.  To have a pre-filled form the client must have shown a basic interest in this transaction otherwise why would it have all their personal details such as name and address and funds and also their phone number.

I have told you why Charles Stanley have their details, they were previously a customer. As for "being unaware" I said it's not impossible but very unlikely as I do monitor all mail and all correspondence  but I am not with my relative 100% of the time. I know that I have not sent any documentation off on behalf of my relative to Charles Stanley and nor has my relative. It seems you are inferring my being somewhat negligent is causing this "problem" - my relative is no longer a client of Charles Stanley and yet they are persistent in trying to poach back business over a sustained period of time. 

Edit to add: I concede I have not contacted them explicitly to ask them to stop, and I am sure they will following that request. Irrespective, I am of the opinion they have been too persistent in this case. 

I would possibly agree with you in part had you not entitled your post as below
Charles Stanley - Aggressively Pursing Customers

There is nothing that suggests they are aggressive in any way.  Sending someone forms in the post is not aggressive behaviour. Sending someone multiple forms in the post so they don't miss out is normal marketing tactic of many companies.   If you asked Charles Stanley they would probably say that they didn't want your client (relative) to miss out on an opportunity as a valued previous customer.  The fact that as a former Client Charles Stanley is marketing its services is no different to any other financial services provider and they are perfectly within their rights to do so. Especially if you have not asked them to stop.  

Sebo027

I apologize for my use of emotive language - they certainly didn't turn up at the house with baseball bats. Regardless the words I used to title my post should not affect whether or not you agree with my statement that Charles Stanley have been too persistent. 

My relative has held investments with multiple platforms (Halifax, Equiniti, Link Asset Services, M&G, Janus Henderson), which they have left and have not been pursued in the same manner.

Sending out brochures and marketing information annually seems normal or typical. Phoning the house to encourage signing off forms that are being sent repeatedly without being requested, to me, seems a tad nefarious.

You're right - they have that right so long as they are provided it (to keep the data) and in my opinion they have abused the privilege, and I will take steps to remedy it.