Reclaiming St James Place costs

dunstonh

My motives are that myself / our family are clients. And we are more than happy with SJP. That's my rights to express here and anywhere else? Just like the IFA's of the forum express their dislike continuously when they have an opportunity it seems.

There are 4 IFAs that post on this site.   How do you explain all the other posters pointing out the high cost of SJP?

If SJP were awful and had done wrong to us then I obviously wouldn't be defending them. But they have been faultless and have always been there when we have needed them. 

No-one has said they are doing wrong.  Where did you get that idea?  Although they have paid out millions to people who failed to get the service they paid for.

As for performance, on average our returns have been 7.8% net of costs and charges over the last 10 years. We're happy with that! 

That doesn't tell us anything without context of the asset make up.   However, seeing as SJP funds generally are mid table or below, a matching portfolio of index trackers would almost certainly have resulted in higher returns and lower costs.

UncleK

Don't be too hard on Bright_Star85. It is human nature to justify previous behaviour, especially over such a long period of time. Some people would not want to even consider the likelihood of not being optimum with their investments for so long. I agree with most on here that SJP come across as smooth talking bandits, having had them try and talk me out of my money, but with so many customers, their fans are bound to pop up. Livens the place up!

gm0

They are sufficiently successful.  And big enough.  To have attracted the attention of the complaints process grievance farming compo spivs.  Who are a plague upon the land and worse than any wealth manager. 

SJP have clearly wronged someone who works for Murdoch/Times group as they consistently get the spanking as the poster child for wealth manager bad behaviour, sales incentives, costs, meetings in sunny places etc. etc. when that comes around on the topics rotation.  Investec, Quilter and other such - marketing departments must be glad of them as the visible target - and a bit jealous of their prior growth and success.  They also generate more threads here - because of google and again - their success.

Business model successful. Increased regulation has made "sole trader" IFA a  harder road.  So aggregation has been a natural development whether it is good for consumers or not. 

I am not an IFA btw. Or an FA.  Just a moderately informed consumer who wants to help out having found the forum useful to my own financial education and retirement planning.  I have no incentive to sell anything to anyone.

There are dozens of FAs who charge more than a high street IFA for pretty much "the same regulated thing".  And some pension transfer/review farms which do a version of the Vanguard service - and charge less. It's all out there if you can bear to wade through the marketing guff to find it.  Personally I hate disclosing all that is required for a proper fact find so I was and still am very choosy about who I will do that with.

You don't need an IFA at all in most circumstances. Bar a legally restricted few requiring a pension transfer specialist for safeguarded benefits/DB. For most it's a choice.  And a contract you read before signing up to it. 

We live (sort of) in a rule of law environment.  So contracts. Choice - consequence.  When I buy petrol locally - it won't be the cheapest in the broader area but Shell don't owe me the difference because I took the deal for convenience.   I don't much care for their new read before fueling terms either.  Current or old versions of financial advice contracts can be litigated as "unfair terms". And the regulator has been sniffing around exit charges in particular - one of the SJP specials.  But in general - good luck with that.  Just a smell of a legal costs payday for rentier lawyers on the make.  Waitrose charge more for branded beans. So what.  Buy the beans you want where you want at the price you accept.

That said - my take on MSE philosophy consistent guidance would be

- DIY if you can (and want to bother).

- Or shop around for whole of market/independent advice - if you can't and don't. 

Depending upon your channel preference, location and wealth level, the latter process can be non-trivial. If a trusted person in your social sphere recommends someone they find trustworthy - that can be a route to finding one.  Even if they turn out to be an FA / wealth manager or gasp -  an SJP reseller.

As it goes.  I did a mischevous "wealth manager" 2023 benchmark thing on another thread this week. 

The extra annual cost of the wealth manager route in my sample was 0.78% of pot value annually for a similar risk tier portfolio and with regulated suitability advice provided in both cases.  Calendar 2023 - benign for equities. 

Cost comparison (based on net of fees returns differences and declared costs where transparent).

DIY cost focused.  ~0.2% - lowest cost equity funds, holding types by platform optimised.  No advice.
Vanguard ~0.6% - inc cut down advice service - VLS80  (advice at 0.3%)
Wealth manager (1.4%) - inc their product and advice

An indie IFA could build a portfolio different ways - but like for like - it will be ~0.5% more than the DIY equivalent holdings as you vary the portfolio shape and move fund management cost up and down.  And half the cost of the wealth manager.

On that basis the premium for more flexible/general tax advice in the IFA relationship over the Vanguard packaged service appears fairly small.

Nothing new under the sun.

Forum has been pointing out for years that wealth management costs roughly 1-1.5% and an IFA costs 0.5%.  And not having one is cheapest - provided you commit to do it competently enough to avoid major error which would swamp the cost savings. 

They charge this amount and enough of us buy it. So it is "market price" for what they do and the way they do it.

Nobody is "wrong" - you buy what you choose.  But no tears please.

It is what it is

Bramhopewarrior

boingy said:

That particular poster has made three posts in total on these forums, all strongly defending SJP. Draw your own conclusions.

Go on Sherlock.Haha

FIREDreamer

UncleK said:

Don't be too hard on Bright_Star85. It is human nature to justify previous behaviour, especially over such a long period of time. Some people would not want to even consider the likelihood of not being optimum with their investments for so long. I agree with most on here that SJP come across as smooth talking bandits, having had them try and talk me out of my money, but with so many customers, their fans are bound to pop up. Livens the place up!

Stockholm syndrome due to the hefty exit charges?

Richard_Dyer

I recently transferred for my modest pension pot out of SJP and was relieved not to loose an early exit fee, even though I was 2 years off reaching SJP's notorious 6 year threshhold for zero fees. 

After a lot of research into alternatives (mostly at the University of YouTube) I decided to open a SIPP account with Vanguard UK for most of it plus a smaller investment with Hargreaves Lansdown - who have a useful tool for maximising interest on short term cash deposits - because I was impressed by the financial wisdom of it's founder the late John Bogle regarding passively managed index funds.

"Rather than try finding the needle in the haystack, just buy the haystack"

Curious as to wether I could claim compensation for SJP, I made an initial enquiry to a Legal Claims Company called AMK Legal. Even though I explained that IMO my SJP partner had not transgressed any advisory rules, they were still very keen to progress a claim. Obviously because they stoold to gain 40% of any resulting payout! I  wasn't impressed by their annoying persistance to get an e-signature from me, so I definately won't be proceeding.

So to answer the question voiced above "Is this another PIP Claims fiasco". IMO probably yes.

robatwork

This forum is actually a model of reasonableness when it comes to recommending, or warning about, investments and advisors.

Nobody has suggested SJP aren't genuine or never produce good results, or don't take care of their clients.

It is widely suggested by experienced posters that SJP are on the pricey side, and a decent DIY approach, or a decent IFA, can produce better results, and are by and large cheaper, thereby fulfilling the "raison d'etre" of this forum (saving money).

There is also plenty of historical data that the majority opinion on these finance forums turns out to be correct - just search here or on google for LCF (London Capital & Finance) for a financial company where the minority were strongly defending and the majority giving a healthily cynical opinion on. Spectacular failure of a company.

dunstonh

Even though I explained that IMO my SJP partner had not transgressed any advisory rules, they were still very keen to progress a claim.

Look at the template letters ambulance chasers use. You will see they don't perosnalise the complaint to your scenario but just send a standardised template with any complaint reason possible, even if they clearly don't apply and hope that something sticks.    Some don't even do that.  They just email the complaints department of SJP with a spreadsheet of names and addresses and force SJP to carry out past business reviews on that adviser.

 Obviously because they stoold to gain 40% of any resulting payout! I  wasn't impressed by their annoying persistance to get an e-signature from me, so I definately won't be proceeding.

40% (plus VAT as its a Vatable service) indicates they are either not getting much success or they believe most SJP customers are mugs that have become so used to paying high charges, that they are game to be taken for even more money.

It's not often I feel sorry for SJP, as you reap what you sow.   However, they have clearly become a target for claims companies and the media.     (media, as in all the anti-SJP articles, the Telegraph keeps running despite SJP being a partner of theirs for some years but not any more - funny that!)

wendybrown

@dunstonh do you have the template letters, please? Thanks 

dunstonh

wendybrown said:

@dunstonh do you have the template letters, please? Thanks 

There is no reason for me to have a template letter used by an ambulance chaser.

And you shouldn't use a template letter.  Template letters have a lower success rate than personalised complaints and on something like this, it is a doddle to put in a personalised complaint.