CIS mini isa

dunstonh

Ahh, i just did a check on my postcode and noticed they have given a bigger prominance to the paid for entries and not only "greyed" the non-paying entries but also made the entries much smaller.

Normally you get pages of them but when I checked my own I nearly missed it because the entry is so small now compared to the paid for ones (of which there were only two on the first page).

mikey01

Hi there does anyone know whether its best to do a FPC or CEFA? I already have CEMAP and was wondering if anyone had done it? Thanks

dunstonh

mikey01 wrote: »

Hi there does anyone know whether its best to do a FPC or CEFA? I already have CEMAP and was wondering if anyone had done it? Thanks

Go with the CII option. The CII have exams to higher levels and if you want to be an adviser you will need the higher qualifications. Only sales people will need the lower qualifications.

Keybiz

Once again, it pains me to hear some of the comments on here about 'transfering to a better S+S ISA' . NO ONE can predict the future so what may have been a great past performer, no way guarantees the future. Trust me I have a wide spread of investments, both CIS and HL funds noted as high calibre. They all have peaks and troughs and suffer in times of uncertainty.

Echo, ask yourself, is a double your money+ return in 7 years good? I know i'd be happy. We can all point to funds that have invested in exotic and specialist areas that have delivered stunning results, but with that comes increased risk and no guarantees for the future.

As regards comments that 'CIS are not real advisers' - having Known several, they must all take and pass the FPC/ associated equivalent in order to present to clients. In fact, one I know has passed his advanced qualifications making him as qualified, and in some cases, more so, than some IFA's! Before the barage of abuse comes back...this is not to say IFA's are not worthwhile, just that there are some big generalisations being made.

dunstonh

Once again, it pains me to hear some of the comments on here about 'transfering to a better S+S ISA' . NO ONE can predict the future so what may have been a great past performer, no way guarantees the future. Trust me I have a wide spread of investments, both CIS and HL funds noted as high calibre. They all have peaks and troughs and suffer in times of uncertainty.

The fact doesnt change that buying from a tied agent restricts you to a limited choice and sees you paying full charges.

So, in that respect cheaper and better ISAs exist.

As regards comments that 'CIS are not real advisers' - having Known several, they must all take and pass the FPC/ associated equivalent in order to present to clients. In fact, one I know has passed his advanced qualifications making him as qualified, and in some cases, more so, than some IFA's! Before the barage of abuse comes back...this is not to say IFA's are not worthwhile, just that there are some big generalisations being made.

From next year, tied agents will not be able to use the term adviser and will not have an advice process. They will be referred to as sales reps or similar to reflect their sales process. IFAs will have to have the higher qualifications and will be the only type of adviser. Sales reps will only require the lower qualifications.

Of course, there are generalisations in most of the things on this website but all things being equal, getting whole of market access, cheaper products and a more qualified adviser (under post RDR rules) makes more sense.