Ifa, dfm and financial planners (fp) all in it together!

gaz123456789

Writing on behalf of family member who has experienced the above companies.

Was a customer for approx 8 years paying top dollar to an ifa by way of dfm and fp for ultimately a service we could have done elsewhere cheaper and better performance (in hindsight).

Had a sipp that was invested with Zurich which was then transferred to Curtis banks and other companies throughout, each time incurring charges to the ifa.  

The final nail in the coffin was that we found they had chosen a tiny custodian for a small amount of funds they manage (dfm due diligence error) who clearly were trying to line their own pockets due to the costs saved using this company (called ibp markets, who have subsequently been forced into administration by the fca) and currently a portion of the sipp is frozen and we can’t get our tax free cash out, still being charged by the ifa and dfm.

During the custodian mess, the ifa was not clear about the issues that had arose. Delaying tactics, almost not wanting to visit, going through the motions.

Dfm choosing equities that have lost money, some even with zero!

The fp director, also a director of the dfm as well (is this not a CoI?) believes they acted accordingly without any blame whatsoever.

Dfm, in their own arrogance, didn’t even acknowledge our complaint until the fos were involved. 

Be aware of these tiny companies out there. 

Stick to the larger entities that cost a little more and avoid these flimsy businesses who are pocketing as much as they can to the detriment to their customers!

eskbanker

gaz123456789 said:

Dfm, in their own arrogance, didn’t even acknowledge our complaint until the fos were involved. 

What's been the outcome of escalating these complaints to FOS, assuming you'll have referred all three there if you're asserting negligence, etc, and haven't got anywhere with complaints to the firms themselves?

gaz123456789 said:

Be aware of these tiny companies out there. 

Stick to the larger entities that cost a little more and avoid these flimsy businesses who are pocketing as much as they can to the detriment to their customers!

You haven't named them, so hard for people to avoid them, or do you believe that it's appropriate to warn investors away from small companies as a generalisation, simply because you've had poor experiences with some?

Eyeful

1. Why did they chose these companies or persons to begin with?
2. What research did your family member do before choosing these companies or persons?
3. Do you or your family member actually understand the difference between an IFA & a FA?
4..Was your family member dealing with an IFA or FA?
5. What proof can you offer that Larger companies will be better than the smaller companies?
6. What is the approximate size of the money you are writing about?

RogerPensionGuy

I'm sure there are many great IFAs and the like. 

However the family, friends & colleagues that asked my views on their investment vehicles using IFAs and similar just appear to show multiple fees, charges at many points, lower investment growth than many mainstream low cost platforms. 

The fees and charges are normally not super clear, always there, but just not simple to see. 

But people feel happy using the above, in my experience, when customer tells IFA overall performance is very low compared to low cost platforms, IFA says they will get on to the DFM blah blah. 

Then a few years on, the IFA says they will move platforms and use a top dog DFM. 

If the cash ISA is capped, yet another revenue stream will open up to these institutions if people don't use the simple low cost options. 

Bostonerimus1

"I'm shocked, shocked..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMIyDf3gBoY

dunstonh

It is hard to make out what the scenario is from the first post.

Curtis banks tends to be used in niche areas.    i.e. non mainstream.     Personally, when I come across someone who says they have a Curtis Banks SIPP, my first reaction is what rubbish is going to be held on it.

Stick to the larger entities that cost a little more and avoid these flimsy businesses who are pocketing as much as they can to the detriment to their customers!

Statistically, smaller companies have a lower ratio of complaints per adviser.  Some of the biggest ones have the most liability for weird and unusual stuff (particularly unregulated investments).    It isn't the size of the company that matters.     

The UK's largest advice network did some research many years back and found 99% of advisers were using mainstream options.     1% were not.      The issue, which has said many times here before, is that you should stick to the mainstream. 

RogerPensionGuy

A link below for reference showing a few of the winners and customers on the other side of the fence.

***

https://portfolio-adviser.com/spot-the-dog-number-of-underperforming-mega-funds-on-the-rise/#:~:text=The SJP Global Quality Fund,a total return of 6.4%.