We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
Opinions on Thornton Baines
Comments
-
The charges were 2.95% of the entire pot initially and then 0.95% of the entire pot annually.dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
From what you say that seems expensive. I will decline.
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?0 -
For most private investors an IFA in the local high street would be fine and probably significantly cheaper than a well-advertised national name. It is normally suggested here that you contact say 3 of them and arrange a free half hour initial chat for you to explain what you want and them to explain what they can do for you and the likely costs. Then choose the one that you feel you can most easily work with.adam_l said:
The charges were 2.95% of the entire pot initially and then 0.95% of the entire pot annually.dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
From what you say that seems expensive. I will decline.
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?
Also recommendations from friends and family may be useful.1 -
Many thanks, much appreciated.Linton said:
For most private investors an IFA in the local high street would be fine and probably significantly cheaper than a well-advertised national name. It is normally suggested here that you contact say 3 of them and arrange a free half hour initial chat for you to explain what you want and them to explain what they can do for you and the likely costs. Then choose the one that you feel you can most easily work with.adam_l said:
The charges were 2.95% of the entire pot initially and then 0.95% of the entire pot annually.dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
From what you say that seems expensive. I will decline.
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?
Also recommendations from friends and family may be useful.0 -
Like all industries the financial services has its fair share of jargon, that is difficult to avoid completely.adam_l said:
The charges were 2.95% of the entire pot initially and then 0.95% of the entire pot annually.dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
From what you say that seems expensive. I will decline.
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?
The more you understand yourself, the better you will understand what the IFA is saying.2 -
Is there a reason you feel you need an IFA? It sounds like you already have a portfolio setup with some decent funds in it, is there something additional that you want to get from advice?adam_l said:
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.Remember the saying: if it looks too good to be true it almost certainly is.2 -
jimjames said:
Is there a reason you feel you need an IFA? It sounds like you already have a portfolio setup with some decent funds in it, is there something additional that you want to get from advice?adam_lsaid:
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
Mainly it's to check the I am more or less doing the right thing...
In particular should I diversify with more funds.
The Vanguard funds are not doing well at the moment - but I suspect that is because in general funds are not doing well because of the world economic climate.
I suppose I have been a bit spooked because of the Thorntons Baines rep saying that other funds would perform much better... I just wanted to check that out independently.
1 -
Just hang up on all "cold callers". If you want to do something else then it should be blowing them a raspberry or telling them to "get a life".adam_l said:
The charges were 2.95% of the entire pot initially and then 0.95% of the entire pot annually.dunstonh said:I was cold called recently by a company called Thornton Baines. They offered to conduct a free initial review of my savings, which I agreed to.Cold calling doesn't happen with reputable regulated advice companies. And for pensions and pension investments, it is actually banned. Thornton Baines is a genuine regulated advice company, but are you sure it was them that called and not someone pretending to be them? Clone scams are rife at the moment.The Thornton Baines rep rubbished the Vanguard funds, and the lack of diversification in my holdings. Fair enough.A good IFA is not going to rubbish Vanguard funds. They may have certain mild observations or point out disadvantages. e.g. The VLS range was great in 2011 but there are now cheaper and better-performing equivalents from other fund houses. And their trackers are often not the cheapest or best performing. That said, I have three Vanguard trackers in my portfolio as I deem them to be the best in the areas they are tracking.
Any real adviser that rubbishes Vanguard funds is not a good adviser. Mild observations are fine, but Vanguard funds are good. Maybe not the best in every area, but no fund house is.I am happy to accept that his recommended approach performs better, however the charges seem high. TB want 2.95% of the fund value initially, and then a 0.95% charge per year thereafter. Plus VAT I imagine.Assuming it is the real company, then you would expect higher charges for a London based firm. 2.95% needs context. 2.95% of £50k is fine. 2.95% on £500k is greedy. 0.95% (assuming adviser charge and not all in) is fine on lower values but expensive on higher values. You often find adviser charges float between 0.35% to 1.00% with low values on 1% and gets cheaper as the value goes up). There should be no VAT as intermediation (i.e. IFAs) is VAT exempt. If there is any reference to VAT then it is a mistake by the firm.
From what you say that seems expensive. I will decline.
What is the best way to find an unbiased and fair IFA who won't blind me with jargon?
So why do you need an IFA? You are on a good fund platform and can easily adjust your asset allocation yourself if you want to. FYI your portfolio is very diversified right now.“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”2 -
I suppose I have been a bit spooked because of the Thorntons Baines rep saying that other funds would perform much better.
They are trying to sell you something, so rubbishing the competition and exaggerating the benefits of their products is just sales tactics.
Nearly all investments have gone down since Jan 1st 2022, mainly in the region of 5 to 20 %
A typical mainstream medium risk multi asset fund probably more in the region of 5 to 10%
5 -
Many thanks, that's what I thought just wanted to make sure...Albermarle said:I suppose I have been a bit spooked because of the Thorntons Baines rep saying that other funds would perform much better.They are trying to sell you something, so rubbishing the competition and exaggerating the benefits of their products is just sales tactics.
Nearly all investments have gone down since Jan 1st 2022, mainly in the region of 5 to 20 %
A typical mainstream medium risk multi asset fund probably more in the region of 5 to 10%
Illustrates my lack of expertise in this area. I will educate myself more.1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards