New HL fee structure from 01/03/26

thingswerentthisbadinmyday

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863279#Comment_81863279

That would be my view, too.

Once, I even had trouble transferring a particular Unit Trust/OIEC holding despite having contacted the “receiving” platform to confirm they could accept it. Exactly the same fund, the difference was the “class” of unit. Mine were, I think S class whereas the receiving company could only offer a different class.

It was easy enough for me to sort out - sell the units at HL and buy them back from cash after the transfer went through. But it was a bit of a pain in the …. and it’s one of the things I do worry a bit about if I decide to move my SIPP.

RL11

I contacted Interactive Investor, as I have four funds that I hold with HL, that are available on II but with a different class. They told me their case handler would let me know if they can convert from one class to another or if the funds would need to be sold and I move cash instead. So I guess I still don't know what will happen!

Until 1st March, I can sell them for free on HL and buy them back on II at £3.99 per fund, so not a big cost in the overall scheme of things. Would be nice if II agree to waive any fees though, so I'll ask them to do that, if a sell/buy is required.

thingswerentthisbadinmyday

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863796#Comment_81863796

Likewise, I have in mind carrying out some house-keeping on my HL accounts and tidy up (buy/sell) OIECs before the fees are introduced on the 1st March.

I realise that it’s “only” £1.95 a deal but why pay if you really don’t have to!

thingswerentthisbadinmyday

And one other thing which in isolation is not significant but nonetheless I find irksome and that is Dividend re-investment (I only have first hand experience of FTSE companies).

I have never understood why - when no matter what day in the month that a dividend appears in my account as income received - HL only ever seem to carry out dividend re-investments on or around the 11th of the month. At least that’s what happens in my experience.

I have an ISA with AJ Bell. They re-invest dividends normally within a couple of working days. I have no idea what happens with the likes of II, SW or Fidelity.

As I say, a minor issue in the big scheme of things and on its own, not something which would cause me to transfer. But added into all the other changes - perhaps one more reason to do something rather than sitting on my hands.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863527#Comment_81863527

The article says that units have to be converted to the share class that the receiving platform can hold:

https://monevator.com/the-anatomy-of-a-platform-transfer/

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863886#Comment_81863886

I'm sure we've had some reports of low cost providers not wishing to take on the administrative burden of conversion and instead only offering cash transfer for those funds they do not directly support. So it is probably a "should" rather than a "must".

jimjames

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863796#Comment_81863796

You can buy them on ii for free if you're prepared to wait for the regular investment window, then cancel the purchase for the next month.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863889#Comment_81863889

The link says:

"Say you own a fund on your existing platform, but your new platform only supports that fund in a different share class – perhaps one with discounted fees.

In this case, the holding will need to be converted as part of the transfer process.

The good news is that platforms are obliged to handle this for you so you can still transfer in-specie. It just might take a bit longer."

"Obliged" is stronger than "should". This appears to be the relevant FCA document:

Making Transfers Simpler

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81863999#Comment_81863999

The COBS amendment states that if they are classed as a platform service provider, they "must request the fund manager to carry out, and take any other reasonable steps to bring about, the conversion of the units into the appropriate discounted unit class". However, I am not sure what to make of this in the consultation part:

2.6 - Scope: A few respondents queried the scope of the remedy. In particular, why it applies only to units in investment funds (as opposed to all investments) and only to platform service providers (ie not to firms offering ‘comparable services’ like SIPP or ISA providers, discretionary investment managers and fund managers).

So are SIPPs and ISAs out of scope? A platform service is defined as: platform service, so is the investment management part considered ancillary to the ISA/pension management part?

Since these rules have been in force since July 2020, I'm struggling to see why what is happening in practice seems to be differing from what should happen.

Here is an example from 2023, where it appears an attempt may have been made, but it wasn't successful: Link

I guess it does tick all the boxes - request was made, reasonable steps taken… I think the root cause of this issue was the two providers did not have a shared unit class they both supported, which is quite common when one offers a super-clean class.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81864071#Comment_81864071

It was not long ago that most platforms charged for transfers out and that transfers typically took months and sometimes more than a year. The main suppliers have dropped their transfer fees, but there are still some laggards, notably iDealing. We now have reports of transfers taking days, sometimes even with funds. The are some failures, but there are with just about everything. The FCA has clearly been applying a lot of pressure. Hopefully, they will soon turn their attention to fund class conversions. It seems clear that the FCA rules require these conversions to take place. If they do not, the customer should make a formal complaint and escalate it to the Ombudsman. Perhaps that will give more visibility to the problem, and prompt tougher FCA action.