Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

Apart for having a Labour Government put tax on dividends and undermine
the whole point of saving money in Pension Funds there is the Financial
Advisor.

A better term for these people would be Financial Rogues.

I have just been quoted the following Commissions for;

"Saving for retirement" - 25 year term 50% of the first 12
month's payments plus 0.5% of all payments from month 13.

"Savings and Investments" - Personal and Stakeholder pensions;
4.77% of the amount you invest.

So there could be a year's profit gone immediately!

To cap it all At Retirement - You actually have to pay again! e.g.

Commision on Income Drawdown;

5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
from year 2.

What work is involved?

Income Drawdown is like taking money out of a bank. Phone your Fund
Provider when you wish to take money out and record the yearly sum on
your tax return. All that is required is a table of what you are
allowed to take out given your age and credit. - What could be
simpler!

Deliberately making things sound complicated is an attempt to justify
their fees.

The worse thing is that you have no choice. You are forced to use these
beggars by the Inland Revenue.

What is the best way of getting redress from these people?

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

<> wrote in message
news:
> Apart for having a Labour Government put tax on dividends and undermine
> the whole point of saving money in Pension Funds there is the Financial
> Advisor.
>
> A better term for these people would be Financial Rogues.
>
> I have just been quoted the following Commissions for;
>
> "Saving for retirement" - 25 year term 50% of the first 12
> month's payments plus 0.5% of all payments from month 13.
>
> "Savings and Investments" - Personal and Stakeholder pensions;
> 4.77% of the amount you invest.
>
> So there could be a year's profit gone immediately!
>
> To cap it all At Retirement - You actually have to pay again! e.g.
>
> Commision on Income Drawdown;
>
> 5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
> from year 2.
>
> What work is involved?
>
> Income Drawdown is like taking money out of a bank. Phone your Fund
> Provider when you wish to take money out and record the yearly sum on
> your tax return. All that is required is a table of what you are
> allowed to take out given your age and credit. - What could be
> simpler!
>
> Deliberately making things sound complicated is an attempt to justify
> their fees.
>
> The worse thing is that you have no choice. You are forced to use these
> beggars by the Inland Revenue.

Nope. there are many low cost alternatives, if you don't want advice (if you do
you'll have to pay for it separately).

Example:



--
Andy

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 17:11 +0100, Andy Pandy wrote:
> <> wrote in message
> news:
> >
> > The worse thing is that you have no choice. You are forced to use these
> > beggars by the Inland Revenue.
>
> Nope. there are many low cost alternatives, if you don't want advice (if you do
> you'll have to pay for it separately).
>
> Example:
>
>

or - they will refund
or reinvest most of the commission after you pay their small flat fee.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

On Sat, 27 May 2006 18:44:42 +0000, peter <>
wrote:

>or - they will refund
>or reinvest most of the commission after you pay their small flat fee.

or <>

I pity the poor sods who go along to an IFA and end up paying
thousands of pounds more than the advice is worth or even worse pay
percentage based fees.

Searching on the above company names gives some useful info. -
<>
<>

Daytona

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

<> wrote in message
news:
> Apart for having a Labour Government put tax on dividends and undermine
> the whole point of saving money in Pension Funds there is the Financial
> Advisor.
>
> A better term for these people would be Financial Rogues.
>
> I have just been quoted the following Commissions for;
>
> "Saving for retirement" - 25 year term 50% of the first 12
> month's payments plus 0.5% of all payments from month 13.
>
> "Savings and Investments" - Personal and Stakeholder pensions;
> 4.77% of the amount you invest.
>
> So there could be a year's profit gone immediately!
>
> To cap it all At Retirement - You actually have to pay again! e.g.
>
> Commision on Income Drawdown;
>
> 5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
> from year 2.
>
> What work is involved?
>
> Income Drawdown is like taking money out of a bank. Phone your Fund
> Provider when you wish to take money out and record the yearly sum on
> your tax return. All that is required is a table of what you are
> allowed to take out given your age and credit. - What could be
> simpler!
>
> Deliberately making things sound complicated is an attempt to justify
> their fees.
>
> The worse thing is that you have no choice. You are forced to use these
> beggars by the Inland Revenue.
>
> What is the best way of getting redress from these people?



I just fail to see what all these rants are about. It's pathetic. Just pay
the guy a fee for the work involved. Why use an IFA who only charges via
commission? (He' not an IFA BTW if he doesn't offer you a fee option).

Incidentally, what's "credit" got to do with income drawdown?

Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

Credit = a Positive balance in the bank, building society, or pension
fund (to drawdown on). Financial Advisors can probably sell you a
negative Pension Fund. Some funds probably end up that way anyway.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

wrote:
> Apart for having a Labour Government put tax on dividends and undermine
> the whole point of saving money in Pension Funds there is the Financial
> Advisor.
>
> A better term for these people would be Financial Rogues.
>
> I have just been quoted the following Commissions for;
>
> "Saving for retirement" - 25 year term 50% of the first 12
> month's payments plus 0.5% of all payments from month 13.
>
> "Savings and Investments" - Personal and Stakeholder pensions;
> 4.77% of the amount you invest.
>
> So there could be a year's profit gone immediately!
>
> To cap it all At Retirement - You actually have to pay again! e.g.
>
> Commision on Income Drawdown;
>
> 5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
> from year 2.
>
> What work is involved?
>
> Income Drawdown is like taking money out of a bank. Phone your Fund
> Provider when you wish to take money out and record the yearly sum on
> your tax return. All that is required is a table of what you are
> allowed to take out given your age and credit. - What could be
> simpler!
>
> Deliberately making things sound complicated is an attempt to justify
> their fees.
>
> The worse thing is that you have no choice. You are forced to use these
> beggars by the Inland Revenue.
>
> What is the best way of getting redress from these people?

Best way is to get them beaten up, mafia style. Legally, forget it - the
ombudsman is like a dancing puppet for the IFA's.
Irma

Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

"Irma Troll" wrote
> ... the ombudsman is like a dancing puppet for the IFA's.

Then why did they only agree with the IFA in **less than half** of their
cases?


s.htm#2

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

<> wrote in message
news:
> Credit = a Positive balance in the bank, building society, or pension
> fund (to drawdown on). Financial Advisors can probably sell you a
> negative Pension Fund. Some funds probably end up that way anyway.
>

You won't lose any money in a pension fund if you use the cash fund provided
by the pension company. But would you want to be so risk-averse?

Your choice, not that of the IFA.

Rob

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

> Best way is to get them beaten up, mafia style. Legally, forget it - the
> ombudsman is like a dancing puppet for the IFA's.
> Irma
>

I've no problem with opinions which may not tally with mine, but we seem to
have had a spate of ridiculous unsupported statements recently, which
completely destroy the case for the poster. Get your hair back on.

Rob

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

I have today discovered that my Financial Advisor has gone into
liquidation!

You've got to laugh!

"As a fund of last resort, FSCS can only pay compensation for financial
loss where a firm is unable to meet claims. For investment claims,
compensation aims to put consumers back into the position they would
have been in had they not invested. The compensation limit for
investment claims is GBP48,000 per person."

Not so funny for the hundreds who have been swindled.

Personally I am about =A3100,000 worse off.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

On 28 May 2006 09:37:04 -0700, "Fred" <> wrote:

>I have today discovered that my Financial Advisor has gone into
>liquidation!
>
>You've got to laugh!
>
>"As a fund of last resort, FSCS can only pay compensation for financial
>loss where a firm is unable to meet claims. For investment claims,
>compensation aims to put consumers back into the position they would
>have been in had they not invested. The compensation limit for
>investment claims is GBP48,000 per person."
>
>Not so funny for the hundreds who have been swindled.
>
>Personally I am about £100,000 worse off.

F**k me! That is truly awful.

MM

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

"Fred" <> wrote in message
news:
I have today discovered that my Financial Advisor has gone into
liquidation!

You've got to laugh!

"As a fund of last resort, FSCS can only pay compensation for financial
loss where a firm is unable to meet claims. For investment claims,
compensation aims to put consumers back into the position they would
have been in had they not invested. The compensation limit for
investment claims is GBP48,000 per person."

Not so funny for the hundreds who have been swindled.

Personally I am about £100,000 worse off.


Yes, I agree this is bad news.

Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>I have today discovered that my Financial Advisor has gone into
>liquidation!
>
>You've got to laugh!
>
>"As a fund of last resort, FSCS can only pay compensation for financial
>loss where a firm is unable to meet claims. For investment claims,
>compensation aims to put consumers back into the position they would
>have been in had they not invested. The compensation limit for
>investment claims is GBP48,000 per person."
>
>Not so funny for the hundreds who have been swindled.
>
>Personally I am about £100,000 worse off.
>

Why does the liquidation of your financial adviser mean you have lost
any dosh?
--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

Worse off through taking the Financial Adviser's advice to leave a
company pension scheme.
If you need expert advice, you go to an expert. Never in a month of
Sundays would you expect an expert to be lying through his teeth.
Anyway the Company itself recommended him to me so I may sue this
Company. If a firm wished to reduce the numbers in its pension scheme,
it may have appointed a crooked Financial Adviser? Hum.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

Fred wrote:
> Worse off through taking the Financial Adviser's advice to leave a
> company pension scheme.
> If you need expert advice, you go to an expert. Never in a month of
> Sundays would you expect an expert to be lying through his teeth.

In my experiences IFA's are only expert in who pays the biggest bung.
Irma

Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>Worse off through taking the Financial Adviser's advice to leave a
>company pension scheme.

What was wrong abut his advice?
>If you need expert advice, you go to an expert. Never in a month of
>Sundays would you expect an expert to be lying through his teeth.
>Anyway the Company itself recommended him to me so I may sue this
>Company.

Hmm, the Company recommended him? Was he a tied agent of the company
then?
> If a firm wished to reduce the numbers in its pension scheme,
>it may have appointed a crooked Financial Adviser? Hum.
>

--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

He was the advisor to the Company Pension scheme, the person the
comapny sent to advise those leaving the firm. He was from a FA
partnership not connected with the (American) Company and sat at the
top table during Company functions.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>He was the advisor to the Company Pension scheme, the person the
>comapny sent to advise those leaving the firm. He was from a FA
>partnership not connected with the (American) Company and sat at the
>top table during Company functions.
>
Sorry, I misunderstood your use of the word 'company'. I erroneously
thought you meant the Pension Company - my mistake.

Did you have to leave the co.scheme when you left the company?
--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

No I did not have to leave the co.scheme. I was taked into it.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>No I did not have to leave the co.scheme. I was taked into it.
>
Sounds like a stitch up. As you suggested earlier, the company wanted
you out of the scheme so got the IFA to do the dirty work.

Hmm, what to do next..

1) Although you say you are out of pocket by £100k, how have you
quantified that?

2) Have you tried the Financial Ombudsman?

Finally, try and leave some of the post to which you are replying in
your post, it makes it easier for us all to follow.

--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

John Boyle wrote:
> In message <>, Fred
> <> writes
> >No I did not have to leave the co.scheme. I was taked into it.
> >
> Sounds like a stitch up. As you suggested earlier, the company wanted
> you out of the scheme so got the IFA to do the dirty work.
>
> Hmm, what to do next..
>
> 1) Although you say you are out of pocket by =A3100k, how have you
> quantified that?
>
> 2) Have you tried the Financial Ombudsman?
>
> Finally, try and leave some of the post to which you are replying in
> your post, it makes it easier for us all to follow.
>
> --
> John Boyle

> Hmm, what to do next..
>
> 1) Although you say you are out of pocket by =A3100k, how have you
> quantified that?
>
> 2) Have you tried the Financial Ombudsman?
>
> Finally, try and leave some of the post to which you are replying in
> your post, it makes it easier for us all to follow.

1 It would cost around =A3100,000 plus the =A3135,000 to =A3140,000 in my
present fund to get me back to where I was. This is a big estimate not
exact. It could be more but not much less.

2 I had a lot of correspondence with the Financial Ombudsman who sided
with the FA.
His word against mine, but the fact that his partnership went into
liquidation (
)
indicates that they were possibly mis-selling in a big way.

Fred

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

"Irma Troll" <> wrote in message
news:
> Fred wrote:
>> Worse off through taking the Financial Adviser's advice to leave a
>> company pension scheme.
>> If you need expert advice, you go to an expert. Never in a month of
>> Sundays would you expect an expert to be lying through his teeth.
>
> In my experiences IFA's are only expert in who pays the biggest bung.
> Irma
>

You've obviously had a bad experience and this has made you bitter - which
is a pity. But as John has said, an advisor can only call himself an I fa if
he offers to be remunerated by fees. If you choose the fee option then the
"biggest bung" goes to you - the fee remains the same. If the IFA doesn't
offer a fee option then he cannot call himself Independent - just and FA.

I suggest your judgment is coloured which makes it difficult to be
dispassionate. By no means all IFAs are as you suggest.

Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

The amount of miss-selling that went on demonstrated that some 50% are
downright crooks.
Another complaint of mine is that you are forced by the Inland Revenue
to reveal all that you own to these possible crooks.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

"Fred" <> wrote in message
news:
> The amount of miss-selling that went on demonstrated that some 50% are
> downright crooks.
> Another complaint of mine is that you are forced by the Inland Revenue
> to reveal all that you own to these possible crooks.
>

No, not so. Firstly, it's nothing to do with the Inland Revenue. However,
the regulator (the FSA) does require that advice is only given after the
advisor has sufficient information to give informed advice. You wouldn't
want it otherwise, would you?

But he doesn't need to know things that are not relevant to the issue. Or
you can decline to tell him and he'll then give you advice based on limited
knowledge - which might be dangerous.

Rob

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

No, not so. Firstly, it's nothing to do with the Inland Revenue.
However,
the regulator (the FSA) does require that advice is only given after
the
advisor has sufficient information to give informed advice. You
wouldn't
want it otherwise, would you?

But he doesn't need to know things that are not relevant to the issue.
Or
you can decline to tell him and he'll then give you advice based on
limited
knowledge - which might be dangerous.

Retirement:
"This is the age at which the scheme expects most employees to retire
and begin
drawing the pension (these arrangemnts must comply with Inland Revenue
rules)."
from
agepositive.gov.uk

On the form I filled there space for (apart from all the other assets);
How do yau have in the Bank, Building Society, ISA, PEPs etc etc etc.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

>The amount of miss-selling that went on demonstrated that some 50% are
>downright crooks.
>Another complaint of mine is that you are forced by the Inland Revenue
>to reveal all that you own to these possible crooks.

Eh? They want to know what house I have, what car etc?

Yep - the value of your house and any outstanding mortgage.
The common car is not normally an asset. Vintage cars yes.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>Retirement:
>"This is the age at which the scheme expects most employees to retire
>and begin
>drawing the pension (these arrangemnts must comply with Inland Revenue
>rules)."
>from
>agepositive.gov.uk
>
>On the form I filled there space for (apart from all the other assets);
>How do yau have in the Bank, Building Society, ISA, PEPs etc etc etc.
>
I think you misunderstand., The Inland Revenue (now HMR&C) lay down the
rules to which the pension must comply. But it is the FSA that make the
adviser ask the questions about you.
--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

"Fred" <> wrote in message
news:
> >The amount of miss-selling that went on demonstrated that some 50% are
>>downright crooks.
>>Another complaint of mine is that you are forced by the Inland Revenue
>>to reveal all that you own to these possible crooks.
>
> Eh? They want to know what house I have, what car etc?
>
> Yep - the value of your house and any outstanding mortgage.
> The common car is not normally an asset. Vintage cars yes.
>

It seems to me that you are deliberately trying to work under a
misconception. You aren't forced to tell anyone anything. But if you don't
give enough information for informed advice then you've only yourself to
blame.

Rob

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

Over time, I've noticed loads of IFA bashing posts within this
newsgroup.

I've got no strong feelings either way as to whether people use IFA's
or not - certain regular posters to this group have enough insight and
knowledge to get along quite well without using an IFA, and that's fair
enough.

However, as many people have little conception at all about financial
issues and products (if you had asked me 10 years ago what a Term
Assurance policy was, my eyes would have glazed over) and in such
situations, getting financial advice is usually of some benefit to
them.

While many here see any charge or fee taken by an IFA as a complete
rip-off, the flip side is how on earth do you expect them to make a
living ?

Would you expect your accountant to work for nothing ? The next time
you see a lawyer, tell them that you don't want to pay them a
fee.....See how far you get.

I do agree that there are still a HELL of a lot of IFA's out there
(often those who have been around for a long time) who only seem to be
interested in working on a commission basis. I often speak to people
who inform me that "My IFA doesn't charge me anything. The insurance
companies pay him commissions." The fact that they don't even realise
that this is coming out of their monthly premiums is something I
quickly put them straight about. In general, this type of advisor
generally understands tax and product rules surrounding particular
contracts, but often their investment skills leave a bit to be desired.
It is probably also this type of advisor responsible for the sale of
the majority of investment bonds, when in many cases these are
completely inappropriate (especially for basic rate taxpayers, or those
with unused CGT Thesholds)

I've met plenty of these type of guys, but also lots who are a million
miles removed, and are involved in genuine financial planning - note
the word 'planning', not just 'advice'.

A good financial planner will take all your circumstances into account
and come up with a plan - even if the advice boils down to recommending
that you pay off all your credit card debts before even considering
buying any investment products - of course they will charge you a fee
for their work, but is this not preferable to the commission hungry
advisor who will make a recommendation solely out of the need to
generate some commission ?

Hopefully, the role of the 'financial planner' will become the norm,
and the commission hungry salesmen who can't adapt can slide off into
the interzone of double-glazing territory...


Rgds
Neil.


Rob graham wrote:
> "Fred" <> wrote in message
> news:
> > >The amount of miss-selling that went on demonstrated that some 50% are
> >>downright crooks.
> >>Another complaint of mine is that you are forced by the Inland Revenue
> >>to reveal all that you own to these possible crooks.
> >
> > Eh? They want to know what house I have, what car etc?
> >
> > Yep - the value of your house and any outstanding mortgage.
> > The common car is not normally an asset. Vintage cars yes.
> >
>
> It seems to me that you are deliberately trying to work under a
> misconception. You aren't forced to tell anyone anything. But if you don't
> give enough information for informed advice then you've only yourself to
> blame.
>
> Rob

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

wrote:
> Over time, I've noticed loads of IFA bashing posts within this
> newsgroup.
>
> I've got no strong feelings either way as to whether people use IFA's
> or not - certain regular posters to this group have enough insight and
> knowledge to get along quite well without using an IFA, and that's fair
> enough.
>
> However, as many people have little conception at all about financial
> issues and products (if you had asked me 10 years ago what a Term
> Assurance policy was, my eyes would have glazed over) and in such
> situations, getting financial advice is usually of some benefit to
> them.
>
> While many here see any charge or fee taken by an IFA as a complete
> rip-off, the flip side is how on earth do you expect them to make a
> living ?
>
> Would you expect your accountant to work for nothing ? The next time
> you see a lawyer, tell them that you don't want to pay them a
> fee.....See how far you get.
>
> I do agree that there are still a HELL of a lot of IFA's out there
> (often those who have been around for a long time) who only seem to be
> interested in working on a commission basis. I often speak to people
> who inform me that "My IFA doesn't charge me anything. The insurance
> companies pay him commissions." The fact that they don't even realise
> that this is coming out of their monthly premiums is something I
> quickly put them straight about. In general, this type of advisor
> generally understands tax and product rules surrounding particular
> contracts, but often their investment skills leave a bit to be desired.
> It is probably also this type of advisor responsible for the sale of
> the majority of investment bonds, when in many cases these are
> completely inappropriate (especially for basic rate taxpayers, or those
> with unused CGT Thesholds)
>
> I've met plenty of these type of guys, but also lots who are a million
> miles removed, and are involved in genuine financial planning - note
> the word 'planning', not just 'advice'.
>
> A good financial planner will take all your circumstances into account
> and come up with a plan - even if the advice boils down to recommending
> that you pay off all your credit card debts before even considering
> buying any investment products - of course they will charge you a fee
> for their work, but is this not preferable to the commission hungry
> advisor who will make a recommendation solely out of the need to
> generate some commission ?
>
> Hopefully, the role of the 'financial planner' will become the norm,
> and the commission hungry salesmen who can't adapt can slide off into
> the interzone of double-glazing territory...
>
>
> Rgds
> Neil.
>
The root problem is that we have a Government run in the main by
lawyers. People who can think go in to Science and Engineering. The
lawyers try to govern the country with laws. So the resultant mess has
to be sorted out by even more Lawyers, Taxation experts, Financial
Advisors, Ombudsmen and so on and so on.

The Pension you get is the proceeds of what you have saved for your old
age. There is one simple rule and that is - spread your assets.

Getting tax relief on your contributions is a con. First you may not
live long enough to use it. If you do live long enough you still may
die in a couple of years. When you draw it you pay tax on it - the
tax you never paid in the first place!

Pensions are not complicated, it is the mess of laws and greed that has
screwed up the whole system.

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

> The root problem is that we have a Government run in the main by
> lawyers. People who can think go in to Science and Engineering. The
> lawyers try to govern the country with laws. So the resultant mess has
> to be sorted out by even more Lawyers, Taxation experts, Financial
> Advisors, Ombudsmen and so on and so on.

Hear, hear!


>
> The Pension you get is the proceeds of what you have saved for your old
> age. There is one simple rule and that is - spread your assets.

Absolutely.


>
> Getting tax relief on your contributions is a con.

No, hang on. Would you rather not have the tax relief?

First you may not
> live long enough to use it.

That can apply to anything. But it doesn't make that thing bad.

If you do live long enough you still may
> die in a couple of years. When you draw it you pay tax on it - the
> tax you never paid in the first place!

Generally you get a tax free lump sum of some sort. Is that not worth
having?


>
> Pensions are not complicated, it is the mess of laws and greed that has
> screwed up the whole system.

True, but one thing (the only thing, as far as I can see) that this
government has done is to try to iron out the whole system of pensions -
called simplification. Once it settles down, all schemes will come under the
same rules. Can't be a bad thing.

Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

> Hopefully, the role of the 'financial planner' will become the norm,
> and the commission hungry salesmen who can't adapt can slide off into
> the interzone of double-glazing territory...
>

That's the best bit of writing so far on this thread. I'm pissed off with
the bigoted rantings of those who have suffered under the hands of an
unscrupulous IFA. I'm very sorry for them but painting all IFAs black
because a few actually are is counterproductive. The best thing is to try to
eliminate the cowboys so that the good ones can flourish and be useful.
Bigotry gets you nowhere.

Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

I've just re-read this thread, and the first post states:

>>Commision on Income Drawdown;

>>5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
from year 2.

I wonder who quoted figures of 5.09% commission ?

This equates to over =A37,000 in commission. Now given that this would
be a single transfer from one provider to another, and given that a
standard hourly rate charged by an IFA is c. =A3150, this equates to the
equivalent of 47 hours of work. Err...,, I somehow doubt it.....

I guesstimate it would take about one third to one half of this time,
and any fee / commission should be charged accordingly.

Are these the generic commission figures quoted from insurance company
literature, or has an advisor actually quoted these figures ? I would
say 2% commission is more appropriate in the majority of income
drawdown cases. (unless they are really complex).

Neil.







Rob graham wrote:
> > Hopefully, the role of the 'financial planner' will become the norm,
> > and the commission hungry salesmen who can't adapt can slide off into
> > the interzone of double-glazing territory...
> >
>
> That's the best bit of writing so far on this thread. I'm pissed off with
> the bigoted rantings of those who have suffered under the hands of an
> unscrupulous IFA. I'm very sorry for them but painting all IFAs black
> because a few actually are is counterproductive. The best thing is to try=
to
> eliminate the cowboys so that the good ones can flourish and be useful.
> Bigotry gets you nowhere.
>=20
> Rob Graham

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>,
writes
>I've just re-read this thread, and the first post states:
>
>>>Commision on Income Drawdown;
>
>>>5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
>from year 2.
>
>I wonder who quoted figures of 5.09% commission ?
>
>This equates to over £7,000 in commission. Now given that this would
>be a single transfer from one provider to another, and given that a
>standard hourly rate charged by an IFA is c. £150, this equates to the
>equivalent of 47 hours of work. Err...,, I somehow doubt it.....
>
>I guesstimate it would take about one third to one half of this time,
>and any fee / commission should be charged accordingly.
>
>Are these the generic commission figures quoted from insurance company
>literature, or has an advisor actually quoted these figures ? I would
>say 2% commission is more appropriate in the majority of income
>drawdown cases. (unless they are really complex).
>

Neither, it is the figure put on he bloody awful menu that the FSA
insists is handed out but which bears no resemblance to what actually
happens. Only the customer specific illustration shows the true figure
whichw ill be more in line with what you describe.

The annoying thing is that you could input those figures into the FSA
calculator and it will come out along the lines as the OP.
--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

John Boyle wrote:
> In message <>,
> writes
> >I've just re-read this thread, and the first post states:
> >
> >>>Commision on Income Drawdown;
> >
> >>>5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of your fund value each year
> >from year 2.
> >
> >I wonder who quoted figures of 5.09% commission ?
> >
> >This equates to over =A37,000 in commission. Now given that this would
> >be a single transfer from one provider to another, and given that a
> >standard hourly rate charged by an IFA is c. =A3150, this equates to the
> >equivalent of 47 hours of work. Err...,, I somehow doubt it.....
> >
> >I guesstimate it would take about one third to one half of this time,
> >and any fee / commission should be charged accordingly.
> >
> >Are these the generic commission figures quoted from insurance company
> >literature, or has an advisor actually quoted these figures ? I would
> >say 2% commission is more appropriate in the majority of income
> >drawdown cases. (unless they are really complex).
> >
>
> Neither, it is the figure put on he bloody awful menu that the FSA
> insists is handed out but which bears no resemblance to what actually
> happens. Only the customer specific illustration shows the true figure
> whichw ill be more in line with what you describe.
>
> The annoying thing is that you could input those figures into the FSA
> calculator and it will come out along the lines as the OP.
> --
> John Boyle

The FSA encourages IPA's to give misleading information?

Fred Baker

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

In message <>, Fred
<> writes
>> The annoying thing is that you could input those figures into the FSA
>> calculator and it will come out along the lines as the OP.
>> --
>> John Boyle
>
>The FSA encourages IPA's to give misleading information?

Yes, as did the PIA, Lautro, FIMBRA, etc.,
--
John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

I may be wrong here, but I thought that the menus had to show the
'maximum' commisson that the IFA would be prepared to take.

Therefore, if the menu given by an IFA firm states that 5.09% is the
maximum, then in some cases they will take this.

If the figure is more in the line of 2 - 3%, then this should be the
maximum figure.

Is this the correct interpretation ?

Neil.


John Boyle wrote:
> In message <>, Fred
> <> writes
> >> The annoying thing is that you could input those figures into the FSA
> >> calculator and it will come out along the lines as the OP.
> >> --
> >> John Boyle
> >
> >The FSA encourages IPA's to give misleading information?
>
> Yes, as did the PIA, Lautro, FIMBRA, etc.,
> --
> John Boyle

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

wrote:
> I may be wrong here, but I thought that the menus had to show the
> 'maximum' commisson that the IFA would be prepared to take.
>
> Therefore, if the menu given by an IFA firm states that 5.09% is the
> maximum, then in some cases they will take this.
>
> If the figure is more in the line of 2 - 3%, then this should be the
> maximum figure.
>
> Is this the correct interpretation ?
>
> Neil.
>
To clarify this matter, this IFA in question states:

Product- Income Drawdown

Commission 4.5% of the amount you invest plus 0.5% of your fund value
from year 2

Commission Market Average 5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of
your fund value from year 2

So if that is supposed to be the Market Average, the highest could be
ridiculous

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

OK, I see what you mean.

Asking for 4.5% still seems a bit steep, compared to the amount of work
I guess would be involved (not a huge amount). If you had 17 different
pension plans that were to be amalgamated, it could be, but if there is
only one plan being transferred, it should be relatively
straightforward.

Ask them to quantify what they will be doing to justify such an amount.

I think the main problem with many IFA's who just are'nt moving with
the times is that they still rely on 'big cases' to get them out of the
shit, rather than work on a purely fee-based structure or make charges
based upon their clients entire assets under management.....

Neil.

Fred wrote:
> wrote:
> > I may be wrong here, but I thought that the menus had to show the
> > 'maximum' commisson that the IFA would be prepared to take.
> >
> > Therefore, if the menu given by an IFA firm states that 5.09% is the
> > maximum, then in some cases they will take this.
> >
> > If the figure is more in the line of 2 - 3%, then this should be the
> > maximum figure.
> >
> > Is this the correct interpretation ?
> >
> > Neil.
> >
> To clarify this matter, this IFA in question states:
>
> Product- Income Drawdown
>
> Commission 4.5% of the amount you invest plus 0.5% of your fund value
> from year 2
>
> Commission Market Average 5.09% of the amount you invest plus 0.75% of
> your fund value from year 2
>
> So if that is supposed to be the Market Average, the highest could be
> ridiculous

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

wrote:
> OK, I see what you mean.
>
> Asking for 4.5% still seems a bit steep, compared to the amount of work
> I guess would be involved (not a huge amount). If you had 17 different
> pension plans that were to be amalgamated, it could be, but if there is
> only one plan being transferred, it should be relatively
> straightforward.
>
> Ask them to quantify what they will be doing to justify such an amount.
>
> I think the main problem with many IFA's who just are'nt moving with
> the times is that they still rely on 'big cases' to get them out of the
> shit, rather than work on a purely fee-based structure or make charges
> based upon their clients entire assets under management.....
>
> Neil.

As John Boyle said earlier:-

"Sounds like a stitch up. As you suggested earlier, the company wanted
you out of the scheme so got the IFA to do the dirty work."

This IFA specialises in companies who employ some 20+ workers say.
Theses guys are totally ignorant of IFAs and all the skulduggery
involved.

The IFA looks after their pension scheme and because this nice man is
so helpful and who has helped so many others they have no doubt that he
is giving them the best advice when they leave due to retirement,
redundancy, resignation etc.

So the IFA gets away with charging what he thinks he can get away with.
The guy is removed from the company pension scheme at the minimum
transfer value and the company scheme is quid's in, the IFA is
quid's in. The guy has in fact been robbed by all the people he
trusted.

Any corrupt IFA is on a roller.

Fred

Re: Pension Robbery by Financial Advisors

On 4 Jun 2006 08:40:15 -0700, "Fred" <> wrote:

>
> wrote:
>> OK, I see what you mean.
>>
>> Asking for 4.5% still seems a bit steep, compared to the amount of work
>> I guess would be involved (not a huge amount). If you had 17 different
>> pension plans that were to be amalgamated, it could be, but if there is
>> only one plan being transferred, it should be relatively
>> straightforward.
>>
>> Ask them to quantify what they will be doing to justify such an amount.
>>
>> I think the main problem with many IFA's who just are'nt moving with
>> the times is that they still rely on 'big cases' to get them out of the
>> shit, rather than work on a purely fee-based structure or make charges
>> based upon their clients entire assets under management.....
>>
>> Neil.
>
>As John Boyle said earlier:-
>
>"Sounds like a stitch up. As you suggested earlier, the company wanted
>you out of the scheme so got the IFA to do the dirty work."
>
>This IFA specialises in companies who employ some 20+ workers say.
>Theses guys are totally ignorant of IFAs and all the skulduggery
>involved.
>
>The IFA looks after their pension scheme and because this nice man is
>so helpful and who has helped so many others they have no doubt that he
>is giving them the best advice when they leave due to retirement,
>redundancy, resignation etc.
>
>So the IFA gets away with charging what he thinks he can get away with.
>The guy is removed from the company pension scheme at the minimum
>transfer value and the company scheme is quid's in, the IFA is
>quid's in. The guy has in fact been robbed by all the people he
>trusted.
>
>Any corrupt IFA is on a roller.
>
>Fred

Agreed: and the sad part is that many of these people boast about "my
financial adviser" as though it's something to be proud of.