The end of the IFA ‘long con’

By Tom Bulford Oct 23, 2012

Tom Bulford

Share with
friends:

Comments (60) Print this article

Every now and then I read something that really takes my breath away.

Here’s one: "Charges for financial advice are increasing as a result of the Retail Distribution Review, leaving high-quality advice much harder to come by – except for the relatively wealthy. Adviser fees will rise to between £150 to £400 per hour, with the bill for a financial health check typically reaching about £1,500."

That is just the start!

According to unbiased.co.uk, an organisation that "helps consumers find advisers", "when upfront fees come in, savers can expect to pay £350 to set up a stocks and shares ISA, £600 for retirement planning advice and £750 for investing a lump sum of £25,000, for example."

Gulp! Can this really be true?

Is anybody really going to agree to pay £1,500 for a financial health check and then hundreds of pounds on top of that?

That is what independent financial advisers (IFAs) are certainly hoping. Dream on!

An end to sneaky backhand charges

The background to this is that, from the start of next year, IFAs will no longer be able to accept ‘trail commissions’. That means that they cannot put their customers into funds in return for a commission paid to them over time by the fund manager.

That was a way of hiding their charges from their customers. But from 1 January 2013, this cannot happen. Next year, financial advisers have to come clean. They have to charge their customers up front, in a clear and accurate manner, rather than take sneaky back-handers in the years that follow.

Many customers have no idea of how much they have been charged by this back door method. But now they will know, all too clearly, the cost of this financial advice - and they won’t like it.

Consider what might happen. Somebody with savings of, say £30,000, does not know what he should do with the money. He decides to consult an adviser, who states that his charge will be £1,500. At that point the customer may very well walk away and decide to make do without any professional advice, in which case all sorts of perils await.

But if he agrees to pay this £1,500 – that is 5% of his savings – what will he expect? A friend of mine once paid about £200 for a golf coaching clinic. He was rather disappointed to be told that all he needed to do was place slightly more of his weight on his right foot. He had an uneasy feeling that he had not got his money’s worth.


Penny shares to watch 2013
RHPs issues

  • Red Hot Penny Shares. The definitive guide to what Tom Bulford believes are the best penny shares to buy.

  • Tom Bulford's weekly penny share tipping service.

Red Hot Penny Shares is a regulated product issued by Fleet Street Publications Ltd. Your capital is at risk when you invest in shares never risk more than you can afford to lose. Penny shares can be riskier than other investments – they can be relatively hard to trade and if you need to sell soon after you've bought you might get less back than you paid. Please seek independent financial advice if necessary. 0207 633 3601.


‘Only the very best service to the better off’

Similarly, suppose the financial adviser, having reviewed the customer’s affairs, says "that’s all fine. My advice is to do nothing." Then I think the customer will have rather the same reaction as my golfing friend. But financial advisers being what they are, my guess is that ‘do nothing’ will not be common advice. Much more likely to be "do this and do that and do the other".

But again, there is a problem. How will the customer know whether this advice is any good?

Although the Financial Services Authority, in its infinite wisdom, is trying to prescribe the right advice for everybody it is not that simple. No two people are the same; the range of investment choices is overwhelmingly complicated; and all financial advice is to an extent dependent upon how the future unfolds - and nobody has a crystal ball.

Returning to the article that temporarily deprived me of breath, Patrick Connolly of financial advisers AWD Chase de Vere said that "many firms, like us, are segmenting their customer base and offering only the very best service to the better off", - implying that the rest will have to put up with something inferior.

And Stephen Ford of fund manager Brewin Dolphin explained his firm’s decision to increase its annual fee for discretionary management from £500 to £1,000 with a comment worthy of a politician: "it is not about them going up, it is about them being more transparent". Pardon my scepticism!

Good news for DIY investors

The bottom line is this: if you want somebody else to advise you on your financial affairs or look after your saving, you will pay through the nose. You always have, but now it is going to be much more obvious. But there is an alternative!

It has never been easier for you to manage your own money. The internet has delivered unprecedented information and access to dealing sites. Compared to trusting the professionals a DIY approach is almost guaranteed to save you a fortune.

And by the way, DIY investing is what smart folk are doing already.

• This article is taken from Tom Bulford's free twice-weekly small-cap investment email The Penny Sleuth. Sign up to The Penny Sleuth here.

Information in Penny Sleuth is for general information only and is not intended to be relied upon by individual readers in making (or not making) specific investment decisions. Penny Sleuth is an unregulated product published by Fleet Street Publications Ltd.

Comments (60)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Bob Driver

    (23 October 2012, 04:38PM)  Complain about this comment

    Can you explain what happens to trail commissions on deals done before 1 January 2013.Some deals could have been done five or ten years ago.Does the trail commissions being taken automatically stop on 1 January 2013.

  • 2. Londonian

    (23 October 2012, 04:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    Tom Bulford doesn't like commission-based charges or fee-based ones. That leaves IFAs the option of working for nothing or finding another job.

    Fee-based charges are usual in most professions these days. Customers are free to shop around for the best deal.

    "How will the customer know whether this advice is any good?" In the same way as in the case of a doctor, lawyer or accountant. There are no guarantees in life.

    Over time, the market will resolve the issues. The bad advisers will not survive and the law of supply and demand will determine the price.

    This has to be one of the worst thought-out articles I've ever read.

  • 3. Louis

    (23 October 2012, 04:45PM)  Complain about this comment

    This sort of idiocy is what drives the man in the street into the clutches of the high street banks who, if you didn't know we're fined over £1 billion for giving rubbish financial advice. I agree the costs will be prohibitive for smaller retail investors but blame the FSA for their incompetence not the ifa community. Many individuals and businesses rely on quality advice to structure their tax and investments. Something that is usually well beyond the scope of the man in the street. Before you start slagging off ifas perhaps start with solicitors who charge three figure sums to answer the phone!

  • 4. Louis

    (23 October 2012, 04:52PM)  Complain about this comment

    Just noticed that this article starts with the words,"every now and then I read something that takes my breath away" . I agree with Londonian that this is one of the most crass pieces of journalism I have ever read. I am also surprised that Money Week allow such drivel to insult its readership!

  • 5. Andrew Clarke

    (23 October 2012, 04:53PM)  Complain about this comment

    I can only presume Tom's tips and advice are free? Agree with the above, what a poor article. A good IFA plans a client's financial life for them and helps them meet their objectives over a very long time. Tom suggests a few punts that may or may not be suitable or successful with zero liability on his part.

  • 6. graham

    (23 October 2012, 05:07PM)  Complain about this comment

    Come off it, Tom. If you don't want to pay for "my advice is to do nothing" then presumably you wouldn't settle your surveyor's fee when buying a house or your MOT charge if they found nothing wrong, either.

    What price peace of mind?

  • 7. Tim

    (23 October 2012, 05:12PM)  Complain about this comment

    I'm not an IFA, but I do use them and I see their advice as valuable. I see the upfront charges as a barrier to a valuable resource of information, and I'm unlikely to pay upfront charges and I don’t have time to self-manage my investments. So now I'm in a much worse possition to make descisions about my future....

    You're advised of the commission an individual (IFA) will earn on a contract upfront so I see this as the FSA meddling to destroy a sector and its tertiary suppliers.

    The article by Tom above is a joke and the worst piece of unbalanced journalism I have read since I last looked at the Daily Mail….

  • 8. Just a thought

    (23 October 2012, 07:00PM)  Complain about this comment

    Tom
    Just remind me what your charges are to subscribe to your service? Any guarantees in your tips? Where do I go to claim compo when your tips fall flat? I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this, but nothing in life is free and sometimes, having someone else to point you in the right direction is the best course. This is simply a rant at IFA's for no other reason than perceived high cost. Instead of ranting on a subject, which, I suspect, you have no recent experience of, how about actually offering suggestions to how IFA's could offer a better service and how about suggesting what you think is a reasonable fee?

  • 9. AW

    (23 October 2012, 10:53PM)  Complain about this comment

    Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! IFA's to work for nothing or be scoundrels. Fees to be set at a level where the least well of can't afford them? So what about your tip service Tom? Can I have it for free? The free e-mails are very poor value and you are giving them away!

    I am very disappointed by the crass sweeping generalisations and selective snippets you always seem to go for. Even the highlighted comment from the last discussion is biased (as opposed to Independent or a representative sample) seeing it is the only positive one from the 10 left.

    Insulted? Yes. Disappointed? Yes. Likely to take the paid for tips? No!

  • 10. magic monkey

    (24 October 2012, 09:59AM)  Complain about this comment

    I have been a subscriber to Moneyweek for a number of years and as an IFA i believe this is the worst article i have seen and is very miselading.

    As a highly qualified individual, equally as qualified as a lawyer or an accountant who charge for 'their advice' and at high leveles in most cases, when i advise clients they are paying for my 20+ years experience and receive thorough diagnosis and solutions where necessary.

    My point is - professional expertise and value for money are worth paying for - well done Tom in adding more people to the increasing mass market that will try a DIY approach and then when it goes wrong wont know where to turn or will, by there own inexperience have left themselves in a position where they wont be able to afford the help they then need.

    This is definately not an 'unbiased' article and is insulting to professionals such as myself!!

  • 11. Ross

    (24 October 2012, 02:54PM)  Complain about this comment

    I wholeheartedly disagree with almost every comment left on this article. A transparency of charges is a must, in order to provide any relative balance of value that IFAs hold for their clients. It will force them to better communicate their services + products to clients and allow them to decide who may be better for them. The current climate is wholly positioned towards IFAs (and away from consumers), allowing them to charge what they like because of the lack of clarity within the industry.

    The laws of the free market, supply and demand will dictate what people are prepared to afford over time and this should also wean out IFAs who are not providing a sound service, thereby reducing some competition for their service.

    I do agree, however, that IFAs seem to have been tarnished with the same cynical brush within this article.

  • 12. Kent Man

    (24 October 2012, 06:38PM)  Complain about this comment

    Have the IFA club all decided to rubbish this article.

    Truth is for the vast majority of people they just need to follow one of the portfolios widely available on investment sites, rather than paying ridiculous fees. Problem is mainline press need to point people towards good sites.

    Good IFA's are required for more complicated issues, these more complicated issues likely to involve the better off.

    Now charges are clear I am sure people will make up their own minds.

  • 13. Demystifyadvice

    (24 October 2012, 07:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    The IFA community may have come together because this is a poor article as are the articles coming from the telegraph and mail. Most financial planners are already fee based so charges are clear and have a good service proposition with many happy clients. There is a place for both advised and DIY. The problem for DIY investors providers don't have to disclose their charges until 2014 which makes it hard to compare. What I would like to see is less of this and more about financial planning education so individuals can decide whether they want to go DIY or go to an adviser.

  • 14. David Hearne

    (24 October 2012, 08:53PM)  Complain about this comment

    I’m happy to state upfront I'm an IFA and to use my real name. Clearly I am writing from my professional position, and Tom as Editor of 'Red Hot Penny Shares' from his. However an important distinction is that when I give investment advice it has to be suitable for the individual client, but when Tom does, it doesn't.

    I think it’s important to point out that Moneyweek and Merryn Somerset Webb in particular in her excellent blogs have long favoured Fee Only IFAs. Any search of past articles easily shows this, and at the bottom of this webpage, under Tips and Advice, there is a section for 'fee only IFAs' So the timing of this article seems odd when we are so close to realising the end of commissions, and all IFAs becoming fee only.

  • 15. David Hearne

    (24 October 2012, 08:56PM)  Complain about this comment

    To me, Tom is missing the broader point and benefit of the Retail Distribution Review, however I can understand this, as I believe many IFAs miss this too. It just shows how engrained the product and commission model is for so many people.

    As previously said Financial Planning is about Peace of Mind, its about knowing when you can retire, knowing if you can take that cruise, and when you can make that charitable contribution or gift to your child. The Independent bit, about recommending a product if required, and sourcing the best provider is in reality a very small part of the process. So of course it will look extreme to suggest a £1,500 bill for a £30,000 investment. The bill isn't for the investment, it could easily be the same bill for a £300,000 investment. At last though people have a choice about what they pay for and know this before making any decisions, surely a good thing?

  • 16. Impromptu

    (24 October 2012, 11:06PM)  Complain about this comment

    I don't agree with the premise that basic risk assessment and tax planning are beyond "the man in the street". Following that, the majority of people could hit their objectives with half a dozen funds, and most with just two or three.

    I do agree that objective counsel can be useful and peace of mind is something that many will value.

    Fixing the average kitchen leak is not complicated and costs next to nothing. Doing your own accounts, conveyancing or probate, the same. The only issue is whether people are comfortable with assuming the responsibility. The option to DIY has always been there, and recently the same is true of investment.

  • 17. mark

    (25 October 2012, 10:45AM)  Complain about this comment

    the journalist worries about 0.5% of the 1.5% annual fee going to the adviser instead of going to the unit trust company as it used to. in other words the unit trust company has in the last 20 years had their margins squeezed in return for a distribution mechanism. there are soooo many other things to worry about before this. for a start how about the deceit of TER's, a financial transaction tax that will simply be passed onto the consumer, a target rate of inflation which means we all lose by a certain percentage......i could go on and on and on. Such a poor article which is one reason why i stopped subscribing some time ago.

  • 18. Hawker

    (25 October 2012, 10:47AM)  Complain about this comment

    It's easy to see who are the IFAs!

  • 19. RawMoney

    (25 October 2012, 10:50AM)  Complain about this comment

    Which is a higher risk, advice from a qualified IFA or from a publication about penny shares?

  • 20. Andy S

    (25 October 2012, 11:00AM)  Complain about this comment

    I am a Mortgage Advisor. Our fees are always disclosed up front and with complete transparency. I charge a fee to research the mortgage market and arrange the mortgage for the client and also receive a procuation fee from the lender. The client knows exactly how much it will cost them to use my services. They have a choice, use me and pay for the service or do it themselves and assume the responsibility for doing so. Bottom line, if they don't want to pay then do it yourself! IFA's have to research an even more complicated market of products, so if a client does not feel they are able to do this or have the time then I am sure they will be happy to pay the transparent fees that the RDR has led to. Surely this will mean that the good IFA's will do well and the poor one's will leave the industry. IFA's who are not happy with the new fee structure makes me wonder what you have to hide!

  • 21. Godnose

    (25 October 2012, 11:03AM)  Complain about this comment

    I am not an IFA and generally don't use their services but I believe the RDR has been a blatant attempt to drive the fragmented private investment and savings market back into the clutches of the big banks.

    These organisations are now having to refocus on this end of the market as the credit-driven free profits available between 1998 and 2008 have now dried up (except for those provided on a plate by QE!).

    The timing of the change in legislation has more to do with lobbying by the banks and insurers and much less to do with driving transparency for the man on the street.



  • 22. Andrew

    (25 October 2012, 11:07AM)  Complain about this comment

    Absolute rubbish comment from an anti IFA journalist. Not even worth the paper it is written on.

  • 23. SH

    (25 October 2012, 11:14AM)  Complain about this comment

    As a city worker (non-IFA) i've been a long time subscriber to MW and the various daily emails. I also find he article to be one of the worst i have read and agree it misses the point of RDR. Also, there are some clear biases at play > IFAs rip you off > move to DIY > here's my (paid for) newsletter sign up link. hmmm

    makes one wonder when the newsletter writers may finally fall under the regulators view. No doubt after a crisis not before. Twas ever thus...

    Still, an interesting debate. Personally I can see the IFA industry greatly reducing and the man on the street being left with dire restricted advice from 21 year olds in high street banks. Will be PPI mark II. I plan on completing my CFA then leaving the UK for good.

  • 24. david craig

    (25 October 2012, 11:34AM)  Complain about this comment

    The simplest way to invest without charges is to look at the sales bumf for a few reasonable unit trusts, see which are the main shares they hold, knock out a couple which you suspect are disasters and buy the others directly yourself. In this way, you get the fund managers' expertise without paying anyone for advice.

  • 25. Malcolm

    (25 October 2012, 11:49AM)  Complain about this comment

    I'm all in favour of the RDR and think it can only be a good thing for charging to be transparent. I'm not suggesting that most IFAs are crooks, but it's more than my faith in human nature will allow to believe that IFAs will always recommend the best for the client when there is such a large financial incentive under the current system for them to take into account what's best for them.
    I agree it might be even worse for the man in the street to be pushed into the arms of their bank for advice, and I despair at the number of my friends who, whilst being sensible in most matters, continue to believe that their bank will give them good, instead of self-serving, advice.

  • 26. Ian Watson not hiding behind a pseudonym

    (25 October 2012, 12:12PM)  Complain about this comment

    As an Accountant turned IFA, I share the concern about how SOME IFA's have acted in the past . However, the IFA role is far wider than just Investments, with or without "Commission".

    Many intelligent people do not know about tax relief on Pensions, or CGT on 2nd homes, or how Life and Critical Illness cover differs.

    We charge for that advice as part of the "commission" earned on the product sale, which is being stopped. Thus, the "free first hour" meeting won't be free, and many will go it alone.

    This leaves them vulnerable to non - independent target driven product floggers who may or may not have to declare their charges.

    Many IFA's have been fee based for ages as they can show how they add value to clients' financial lives. Those who cannot are in decline.

    I hope the IFA market produces a mass market choice v clearing banks, who do not advise at all, but are on every high street to ensnare the unsuspecting bypasser . . . .

  • 27. Stewart Massey

    (25 October 2012, 01:08PM)  Complain about this comment

    The article is very poor. Tom states on his marketing blurb, in the risk warnings "Always seek personal advice if you are unsure about the suitability of any investment." I wonder if he states where you can get this free advice? Regarding comment 24 above - anyone can invest money. It is the exit strategy that determines the result. You could subscribe to the penny shares letter promoted in this article, take the tips and cancel the subscription in the trial period - how will you then have access to the more important info - the expert opinion on when to sell..? The same is true with the unit trust manager. Also worth noting that the UT manager has a mandate to diversify risk. If you buy only a few of the holdings, the risk profile is certainly different to the fund you are trying to imitate.

  • 28. drmr

    (25 October 2012, 01:37PM)  Complain about this comment

    I recently went to an IFA to arrange a mortgage. His recommendation was a mortgage with the 'commercial arm' of a building society that was at an initial rate of 0.4% higher than a mortgage I'd found on the internet the night before with the same building soc (all other conditions/fees the same except that his recommendation also reset to an SVR 1% higher than what I found). He still got £400 just for applying for the mortgage I'd found. IFAs may be more useful for more complicated matters but if I'd used his recommendation I'd have just been ripped off (this alone has repaid my MW subscription over the years, as MSW is forever complaining about commissions). I think IFAs might be in for a shock when the realise what the actual value of their advice is worth (though I suppose existing trail commissions will keep them happy for several years yet).

  • 29. joe soap

    (25 October 2012, 02:02PM)  Complain about this comment

    Hehehehehe stopped reading the bleats about halfway down so my apologies if anyone sensible commented after this point.
    To all you IFA`s YOU`RE CHARGING TOO MUCH that`s all there is to it. You`re not worth your £100+ per hour,,,, fewer of you doing more work and servicing more clients for a greatly reduced rate and it would still work out at a salary that would be unlikely for you to earn elsewhere. Your advice is little more than common sense anyway that anyone with half a brain should already be doing and as was said in the above article, all the information is out there for those that choose to look. Generally speaking and unlike what so much of the punters think, you are not clever clever people that can turn lead into gold.
    The games up !!!

  • 30. jimtaylor

    (25 October 2012, 02:37PM)  Complain about this comment

    There are some IFAs who are good, but sadly many of them are mediocre at best and rely on the public being too busy to find the time to get familiar with many things that are straighforward if one has the time to do the research.
    The mediocre IFAs should get squeezed out of the business and get a job in somewhere like an Amazon Fullfilment Centre and leave financial advice for the few good ones left for clients who can afford and really want proper advice.

    Moneyweek continually encourages readers to take an interest in their own financial affairs and for most things this is the best way and I would only pay for really specialist advice, otherwise it means paying someone else too much for something I can do myself.

  • 31. Graham Wadsworth

    (25 October 2012, 02:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    Well Tom, you seem to have touched a bit of a raw nerve with the IFA community. But if my experience is anything to go by, they are going to have to get their act together. 18 months ago, an IFA volunteered to carry out a financial review for me. The advice in respect of my pension drawdown was 'nursery'. As my risk profile was adventurous, he suggested putting the whole of my drawdown pension into high risk funds, in my opinion, not a balanced portfolio for a draw down. In respect of my cash, he suggested a combination of bonds and ISAs. However, the reduction in yield of his portfolio was over 3%. So, if the investment managers achieved 7% growth, I would receive less than 4% and the IFA, the platform managers and the fund managers would get the balance. So, I put up the money and everyone else dips their beak into the pot. Since then, I have continued to manage my self select ISA with the help of advice from MW and I am very pleased with the result.

  • 32. briand

    (25 October 2012, 02:54PM)  Complain about this comment

    Like bob driver Oct 23 I would like to know what happens to trail commission deals set up prior to Jan 1st 2013? I suspect the answer is nothing, they just keep rolling along until you sell the offending investment. More interesting still is how can you change your IFA AND stop the payments to the rubbish adviser you were daft enough to pick originally, without having to sell everything and start all over again. Now that would be expensive!

  • 33. Pete

    (25 October 2012, 09:53PM)  Complain about this comment

    @Bob Driver - RDR only applies to investments recommended from 1 January 2013. Any investments made up to 31 Dec 2012 can continue to pay trail to the adviser until the investor sells or switches their investment into a different fund/product.

    As someone who works in funds, have come across a number of IFAs, some who were a lot better than others, but almost all of whom were streets better than your average bank or life assurance salesman (adviser seems a misleading term for these). I'm happy to DIY, but a lot of people need decent advice and too many of these already end up in the hands of the banks who usually sell them rubbish they don't need or want, and I suspect this will get worse in January.

  • 34. Pete

    (25 October 2012, 09:57PM)  Complain about this comment

    Incidentally, are people aware that the FSA is considering banning "execution-only" mortgages? I have nothing against people offering decent, well considered, independent advice, but think its a complete insult that the FSA don't think I can do my own research and make my own mind up on which mortgage I want. No doubt another move that will play into the hands of the banks...

  • 35. James

    (25 October 2012, 10:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    I have found Moneyweek and Red Hot penny Shares emails interesting for the last few years. However, I am now getting really tired of the constant deriding of IFAs and pushing people towards DIY which i think is downright dangerous for the majority of people.
    Pay for regulated financial advice from a professional person who is at the end of the phone, should see you regularly, gets to understand you and your aims VS pay for a subscription to an email newsletter, unregulated, no personal advice.....
    I'd love to know how many private investors have lost money they can ill afford from Falkland Islands oil shares etc etc. yep,Tom will have said it's 'high risk' in amongst 95% of the article encouraging people to buy the shares.

  • 36. Hazel

    (26 October 2012, 08:42AM)  Complain about this comment

    My mother left a sum of money to my nephew (a minor). Her solicitor, who is also a trustee for the fund, recommended a financial adviser. The adviser charged £1000 to provide investment advice and then recommended its own fund!!!!!

  • 37. Hugo

    (26 October 2012, 10:14AM)  Complain about this comment

    Interesting to read Tom's advert disclaimer suggesting that potential subscribers to his service should seek independent financial advice if necessary, and that his investment tips are very high risk.

    Make your mind up! Poor article.

  • 38. wilksy

    (26 October 2012, 11:47AM)  Complain about this comment

    Tom - I am the lowest of 'lay people' on all this investment stuff but very keen to learn as I and my husband have retirement income but still work so have money to invest, but not oodles. I am reading your daily output along with your various colleagues but the amount of criticism you have received on this latest article is worrying me greatly! They can't all be wrong; they aren't all IFAs. Think I'll have to play safe and stick with HL and not be tempted off this path.

  • 39. mike

    (26 October 2012, 04:44PM)  Complain about this comment

    who really believes that 'commissions' of sorts will NOT be paid via the back door?
    i think that some oiling of the wheels will continue.
    subscribe to a good financial mag like 'investers Chronicle for starters!

  • 40. Graham

    (30 October 2012, 05:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    If you think that it is only IFAs who do not provide the service that investors need, try in-house advisers. I have a SIPP with a well known provider and after a risk-assessment, they put me into one of their portfolios with access to a platform for me the check how well the funds in various assets classes were doing. Not very well so far (5 years) I asked for a comparison against the top 5 funds for my funds in my SIPP and to cut a long story short, they would not provide me with that information. How can we take decisions without some comparative information. I complained to the Financial Obudsman Service. Guess what?. The FOS said that they do not know of any SIPP provider which would give me that information. So what am I paying my 0.6% annual fee for?

    'Caveat emptor' my friends and if anybody else has had a similar experience, I would like to know

  • 41. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:40AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 1
    I was interested to read the comments around this article and believe it is right to comment further.
    Picking up on the negative comments first, yes there are bad IFAs like there are bad eggs across all industries including journalists. It is also true that by doing nothing IFAs can continue to receive commission without disclosing this to clients.
    However, there are two things and this is why I believe this is a poor article. Firstly we are talking about a minority, and actually the majority have over a number of years moved to a fee based model with a good service proposition and happy clients. I note the comment from Graham and as we say to our clients if we are not delivering on our service proposition then ultimately vote with your feet.

  • 42. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:42AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 2
    I dislike the word IFA because I believe actually what you are paying for is a financial planner. A financial planner helps you draw up a plan and then finds the appropriate solutions to deliver on that. Interestingly the papers talk about fees of £200 per hour but the fees vary. They can be monetary, they can be a retainer or they can be a percentage of the assets managed, or a combination of this.

    For example we charge up to 1% of assets managed. Of course you can go direct and I will cover this. Recently I worked out that a mid-range solution which we developed for a client cost around 1.5% p.a. by going direct and with us it cost 1.72% (this included our fee of 0.75%). The additional expenses on both platforms was around 0.14%. So in reality the net cost for advice was around 0.22% p.a. I would also add that these fees are fully disclosed to our clients.

  • 43. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:43AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 3
    So responding to Graham’s comments look carefully at the fees and the service proposition before you decide what route you go down. I believe strongly that there is a place for both advised and direct.
    RDR is a great step forward to remove the bad eggs but my second point is that whilst the papers write about how bad financial planners are what they are missing is what is happening in the direct market. Many comments I read talk about the “free” direct platforms. You have to ask how these are funded. These are funded by rebates from the fund houses, these rebates can be anything from 0.5% to 1% (I know this because I developed a DIY platform). They do not have to disclose these fees until 2014. If you choose to go direct the question is are you happy paying these fees? There are some direct platforms who fully rebate their kickbacks to the clients and charge a quarterly fee but these are the minority and not the majority.

  • 44. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:45AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 4
    So whilst we focus on bad IFA practices we should not miss this. The other point is this many people are missing the point, for example Joe Soap states that financial planners are not clever people that can lead clients to a pot of gold. Of course they are not, financial planners are not chasing get rich quick schemes, they look to identify goals and aim to deliver on these goals over the medium to long term. I would also pick up on the clever bit, Financial Planners are very highly qualified individuals. Effectively they are providing peace of mind. If you want to make money quickly then you need to perhaps do it yourself. Remember what Tom promotes is very high risk and many people do not understand this although I notice a couple of you have pointed this out.

  • 45. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:46AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 5
    I was concerned by a comment by wilsky who stated that they were going to play it safe and stick with HL, I assume this is Hargreaves Lansdown. I am assuming (and I could be wrong) that they choose their investments by what is recommended in Investment Times.
    This is a major concern I have with direct platforms because they do not provide any financial education. I know that some have told me they do but in reality (in the same way as I did when I developed a proposition) they purely promote the products they want to sell. And if you buy a fund and stay in it then they can continue to take this hidden trail commission.
    There are many people who can do it themselves but there are also many who can’t and end up having to get help.

  • 46. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:47AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 6
    The point with RDR is not about clear charges, it is not about giving financial planners a good kicking but it is a massive opportunity for journalists and others to provide financial education where products are the end solution and the not at the top. By this I mean those in favour of DIY talk about how easy it is and how much money they make, however many don’t. If I pick funds from HLs top 112 funds I have no idea what risk I am taking and whether this matches with my goals. If I choose a SIPP, or an ISA or both I don’t know whether this is the right solution to deliver my goals.

  • 47. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 09:49AM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 7
    So my point is this financial planners have a right to complain about such a poor article written by someone who has a single aim, DIY investors have a point that you can do it yourself and you can do it well, but rather than fighting we need to come together to deliver good solid financial education which enables people to make informed decisions whether this is by going direct or getting advice.
    As for the fees, well this is for the individual to judge, personally looking at some of the fees for peace of mind I don’t think they are bad. There are some that I would challenge.

  • 48. Don

    (31 October 2012, 12:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    Interesting article and comments. A few points to consider;
    1. How many people have the time and inclination to invest themselves?
    2. How much money is sitting in bank accounts and poor investment funds?
    3. Will banks have to change their charging methods to fee based as well as financial advisors?
    Before I answer, I am an ex financial advisor. Answers to the above;
    1. Very few. Most ordinary people will have their money in a bank account or a tied investment account supplied by their bank.
    2. GBP 9 billion+ in investment accounts (according to the Telegraph - UK). This is because big banks' investments do not need to perform well. Their name alone will make people invest with them.
    3. I don't know. Anyone help me here?

  • 49. Don

    (31 October 2012, 01:01PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 2

    The country, as a whole, does not save anywhere near enough. If RDR leads to less use of financial advisers, then I think it has failed. In my opinion, what is more important than fees is ensuring people are advised correctly. As such, the governing bodies should concentrate more on increasing qualifications, implementing a flat fee remuneration system from fund houses (this could still be based on percentage commission rates), and advise people to seek independent rather than tied advice.

  • 50. Don

    (31 October 2012, 01:02PM)  Complain about this comment

    Part 3

    Choosing investments is not that difficult. There are a lot of top investments out there with solid long term track records, which can be combined to make any level of risk required.

    One final point, if I can get clients returns of 7% pa (long term, definitely achievable) net then does it matter if the charge is even 3%? I'd say no, especially if the client's alternative is to keep their money in the bank.

  • 51. Demystifyadvice

    (31 October 2012, 03:14PM)  Complain about this comment

    Don, interesting comments. I have seen some of the charging structures from banks. One bank fee is £150 plus VAT with a minimum fee of £1,500. I was not clear in what I saw what the annual fee was but my understanding is that they have to move in line with financial planners and their fees will be high. You assessment is spot on advice has a place, as does DIY and to try and put such a stain on advice can only be a backward step. You have the experience and confidence to go down the DIY route, but its a massive assumption to assume all have this experience.

  • 52. Graham

    (01 November 2012, 07:16PM)  Complain about this comment

    Looks like there are a lot of very worried "profesionals" out there !
    Maybe more people will now take some time to sort there own savings and investments out themselves. A little bit of reading goes a long way on this subject. You are right to be worried, the average Joe is now going to find out some truths.

  • 53. Stephen

    (05 November 2012, 11:36AM)  Complain about this comment

    Please could I ask to be quoted fairly please?

    My quotation is is amusing but inaccurate as this neatly missed the point of the quote in its entirity....which is at the same time Brewin Dolphin is converting (at no cost to the client) all its trail units into trail free units. Therefore most clients have been paying Brewin Dolphin more than £500pa, but despite all the relevant disclosures etc, they are not aware of the full amount.

    The Board of Brewin Dolphin, have decided to support RDR and therefore despite easier choices being available, they have decided on the transparent route. In many cases the "cost of ownership" is the same or lower after the increase in the minimum fee as many smaller portfolios have high levels of collectives within them .

    Given my experience - please have the courtesy to check all future quotes by the email address you hold for me.

    Stephen Ford
    Brewin Dolphin

  • 54. Martin the Accountant

    (05 November 2012, 02:16PM)  Complain about this comment

    "Advisor fees will rise to between £150 to £400 per hour..." This is the problem in a nutshell.

    In my experience (in 5 countries), lawyers/accountants still think that charge-per-hour is a justifiable charging method for the mere dispensation of ADVICE. I remember a £500 charge I was asked to pay for being given a weblink to HMRC's own website, for which the "value-add" bit was a conclusion that was INCORRECT. And this was a business-to-business transaction! Sadly, it's far from alone.

    This is what passes for "professional advice" nowadays. It's more to do with protecting the cost of the PII than it is to with understanding the client and delivering the right service. It rests on the falsehood of "chargeable time" and ends up with an ersatz pre-wrapped product that the client didn’t ask for.

    There’s a big difference between service and advice. Only the former justify charges.

  • 55. Retired Investor

    (06 November 2012, 07:05AM)  Complain about this comment

    I think Bob Driver's question is probably the most immediate and pressing. My belief is that the IFA's continue to quietly pocket the trail commission ad infinitum? Can't we simply write to the respective fund providers and instruct them to change the status of the fund to 'no trail' so that the IFA's trail stops and is retained in the fund?

  • 56. Simon

    (20 November 2012, 04:39PM)  Complain about this comment

    Sneaky back handers? Is that what Tom regards trail commission as being. Please remember that trail commission has often been agreed with the client in return for a lower initial charge. The client then has the right to move this trail to another adviser if the service levels he has been promised hasn't been delivered. This is why the majority of the time banks took full commissions as they knew they wouldn't deliver an ongoing service. I can't believe just how slanted this piece of journalism is towards Toms own interests. Invest with me folks and I'll give you a few tips on shares which you can potentially lose the lot!!

  • 57. Billy Bob

    (03 December 2012, 12:17PM)  Complain about this comment

    @ Bob Driver: Trail commission that is set up on business started prior to 1 Jan 2013 will continue to be paid by the insurance company to the adviser post1 Jan 2013. This trail is paid to the adviser for ongoing services to the client. The only way to stop it is a) for the client to confirm the adviser is no longer their adviser, in which case the insurance company will 'orphan' the client on their records and no further commission will be paid, or b) for the adviser to confirm they no longer wish to receive trail commission, in which case the insurance company will generally stop paying it. I am not aware of trail being paid by a fund manager, though this might be possible. It's usually paid by the product provider and comes off the client's fyund value. Its also called fund based renewal or fund based commission.

  • 58. EIS Schemes

    (21 January 2013, 12:33PM)  Complain about this comment

    The intention of RDR was to provide a balanced approach to the marketing of investments, so advisors views were not skewed by whoever was paying most commission, which has in the past made some difference.

    Trail commission is something which many IFAs have become increasingly reliant upon over recent years, and this is one area, which if the advisor is doing little or no work in reviewing the investment opportunity on an annual basis, it does seem somewhat expensive.

    Clearly the number of execution only transactions is increasing, however, many investors do need an IFA to carry out their transactions, as they may not have a full understanding of all the products which are available in the marketplace, and also which are more likely to perform, and more importantly are relevant for the clients risk profile.

    www.enterpriseinvestmentschemes.co.uk.

  • 59. mike Jarvis

    (02 March 2013, 08:15AM)  Complain about this comment

    I have just stumbled on this article. Is this guy for real? He writes like a failed direct sales guy. Can't wait for the world of journalism to have its own RDR to rid this type of idiot out of the industry. Buffoon!

  • 60. mike Jarvis

    (02 March 2013, 08:15AM)  Complain about this comment

    I have just stumbled on this article. Is this guy for real? He writes like a failed direct sales guy. Can't wait for the world of journalism to have its own RDR to rid this type of idiot out of the industry. Buffoon!

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment emailJohn Stepek

Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.

>