FAQ'S AND OBJECTIONS

Over the years we have met different fears and objections, so let us try and address some of those;

Q1) What is stopping you from running off with my money?

Other than it would be theft and fraud, this question shows misunderstanding of Anti Money Laundering policies and of our industry.

We have neither the ability or the inclination.

Nobody, including you, could access your capital without various checks and then it may only be paid into a UK bank account registered in your name.

Of the few scams that we have seen over the last decade, all resulted from people trying to avoid a professional service to save on fees - in other words, they did it themselves.

Please use the correct channels and view investment fees as an incentive and protection for the portfolio to flourish

Nobody has permission to withdraw your capital, even with a signed client form.

Q2) So you could pick a random provider or manager that I’ve never heard of and I have to trust that?

Okay, we see your point. It isn't an issue for us (as we are familiar with all of the firms), so if you only wish to see giant household names within your recommendations please let us know at the first meeting and we shall accommodate.

We can't promise that those multi-million-pound offices were achieved by being the best value provider to the clients, but if that brand name is important for your peace of mind we can use them as a priority for you.

The recommendations presented to you at our second meeting will be in your best interests. It is not through random selection but after extensive research that we generate our advice.

All recommendations are FCA regulated, professional and accurate.

Be assured that we do not offer UCIS recommendations (unregulated collective investment schemes). Most of these use tempting areas of investment such as Crypto currency, Sustainable projects*, Film, Forests and Hotels.

*Sustainable is also available in mainstream regulated investments

Our firm is legally liable for all of our recommendations.

Q3) I could do it myself!

The University of Google can be dangerous.

Yes, you could do it yourself theoretically... Perhaps you would consider which unit price, unit type, asset class, wrapper type, trade time, investment location, tax consequence, allowance limit, currency and risk level? Would you hold tangible assets or synthetic? Would you consider CFD's, ETF's, OEIC's, IT's? Are you sure which are covered by FSCS?

Financial investments attract a landslide of self-proclaimed experts... every golf club appears to have a resident authority on the latest crypto position, gold outlook, shares to buy, etc. Yet would we trust them with our life savings?

Often people don't know what vehicle in which they are invested, let alone the risk, tax treatment, currency or conditions that apply. Many are invested in high-risk ETF's that they considered as lower risk OEIC's, mainly because they are advertised heavily on social media.

These mistakes may give great performance in some cases (if they come off), but most offer huge potential to deplete the capital or create an unexpected tax liability through misunderstanding.

Many DIY trading apps use contract types that are for the highest investment risk takers, yet they are marketed to the everyday Dave. Look at this in the FT Jan 24;

A pensioner who has been left "homeless and penniless" has said platforms should do more to protect vulnerable clients against 'gambling' away hard-earned pension savings in high-risk investments.

When Mr XXXX got access to his pension aged 55, he had £220,000 in his pot but is now left with just £3,000.

The 62-year-old told FT that he lost most of his pension in just three years by being able to put his savings into high-risk investments within his DIY Sipp.

Mr XXXX said his diagnosed gambling addiction drew him to high-risk investments to try to chase returns.

But he said the lack of checks and balances caused him to lose his home and he was forced to return to work as a cleaner to make ends meet.

Mr XXXX said THE PROVIDER with whom he had taken out the Sipp, should have had proper measures in place to flag the losses, considering he had lost so much of his pension value in such a short time.

The FTSE-100 listed company said there was nothing they can do to help Mr XXXX further.

As a vulnerable person Mr XXXX said he should not have been able to gamble away his pension so easily, claiming there were few checks and balances in place.

These reports are far too common. Use the right channels and right expertise and ensure you are protected.

Q4) I just need a form signing, I know what I am doing

We cannot sign that off and accept the liability for the surrender as being in your best interests.

We have received numerous enquiries that showed mistaken understanding of the position. We made the decision to avoid causing any offence we would deny sign-offs across the board, irrespective of the fees being forfeited.

Q5) The money section of my Sunday paper has calculated that over the next 20 years, my adviser will cost my pension about £20,000 because of their fees

What a great shock headline without the caveats of the calculations...

Our income does not come at the cost of your fund's growth. Without us, you'd very likely not achieve that figure in the first place.

Their implication is that you could achieve the same results via a solo DIY method, as a team of full time, qualified professionals, in the same time frame, without any insurance or mistakes and use the correct taxation, protection levels and currency implications. And thus by doing all of that yourself, you would have saved £20,000 worth of fees over that 20 year period... really?

The appropriate analogy would be that you represented yourself in court and you won the exact same damages that the specialised lawyers would have achieved, in the exact same timeframe and saved all of your legal fees over the years, without any legal process mistakes. It's theoretically achievable but very doubtful.

There is little chance you would have gained the quoted returns without us.

A good IFA will pay for themselves through the extra growth and mitigated tax achieved by their work and from which their client benefits.

Let's be frank about it; the more your funds grow, the more we’ve earned too as we have a financial interest in your success. Our success is your success.

Q6) Cash is better!

Cash has a place, of course. Be aware though;

Cash is not free - it is always below inflation, usually around 2% below as it currently stands. That is effectively the bank's fee. Which is quite expensive when considered, would you expressly pay 2% pa for cash account? Yet that is what we do.

The 5% Cash ISA awarded for £1000per month regular contributions for 1yr is great, but only 1 payment of the £1,000pm was in there for 1 year, so it really works out at less than 3% interest. Clever marketing.

Any asset type would be higher risk if that was the only asset you employed.

Diversification across a wide range of assets is a wise risk mitigation strategy.

FAQ's & Objections: Projects

FAQ'S AND OBJECTIONS

Over the years we have met different fears and objections, so let us try and address some of those;

Q1) What is stopping you from running off with my money?

Other than it would be theft and fraud, this question shows misunderstanding of Anti Money Laundering policies and of our industry.

We have neither the ability or the inclination.

Nobody, including you, could access your capital without various checks and then it may only be paid into a UK bank account registered in your name.

Of the few scams that we have seen over the last decade, all resulted from people trying to avoid a professional service to save on fees - in other words, they did it themselves.

Please use the correct channels and view investment fees as an incentive and protection for the portfolio to flourish

Nobody has permission to withdraw your capital, even with a signed client form.

Q2) So you could pick a random provider or manager that I’ve never heard of and I have to trust that?

Okay, we see your point. It isn't an issue for us (as we are familiar with all of the firms), so if you only wish to see giant household names within your recommendations please let us know at the first meeting and we shall accommodate.

We can't promise that those multi-million-pound offices were achieved by being the best value provider to the clients, but if that brand name is important for your peace of mind we can use them as a priority for you.

The recommendations presented to you at our second meeting will be in your best interests. It is not through random selection but after extensive research that we generate our advice.

All recommendations are FCA regulated, professional and accurate.

Be assured that we do not offer UCIS recommendations (unregulated collective investment schemes). Most of these use tempting areas of investment such as Crypto currency, Sustainable projects*, Film, Forests and Hotels.

​

*Sustainable is also available in mainstream regulated investments

​

Our firm is legally liable for all of our recommendations.

Q3) I could do it myself!

The University of Google can be dangerous.

Financial investments attract a landslide of self-proclaimed experts... every golf club appears to have a resident authority on the latest crypto position, gold outlook, shares to buy, etc. Yet would we trust them with our life savings? ​

Often people don't know what vehicle in which they are invested, let alone the risk, tax treatment, currency or conditions that apply. Many are invested in high-risk ETF's that they considered as lower risk OEIC's, mainly because they are advertised heavily on social media.

These mistakes may give great performance in some cases (if they come off), but most offer huge potential to deplete the capital or create an unexpected tax liability through misunderstanding.

Many DIY trading apps use contract types that are for the highest investment risk takers, yet they are marketed to the everyday Dave. Look at this in the FT Jan 24;

A pensioner who has been left "homeless and penniless" has said platforms should do more to protect vulnerable clients against 'gambling' away hard-earned pension savings in high-risk investments.

​

When Mr XXXX got access to his pension aged 55, he had £220,000 in his pot but is now left with just £3,000.

The 62-year-old told FT that he lost most of his pension in just three years by being able to put his savings into high-risk investments within his DIY Sipp.

​

Mr XXXX said his diagnosed gambling addiction drew him to high-risk investments to try to chase returns.

But he said the lack of checks and balances caused him to lose his home and he was forced to return to work as a cleaner to make ends meet.

​

Mr XXXX said THE PROVIDER with whom he had taken out the Sipp, should have had proper measures in place to flag the losses, considering he had lost so much of his pension value in such a short time.

​

The FTSE-100 listed company said there was nothing they can do to help Mr XXXX further.

​

As a vulnerable person Mr XXXX said he should not have been able to gamble away his pension so easily, claiming there were few checks and balances in place.

​

These reports are far too common. Use the right channels and right expertise and ensure you are protected.

​

​

​

Q4) I just need a form signing, I know what I am doing

We cannot sign that off and accept the liability for the surrender as being in your best interests.

​

We have received numerous enquiries that showed mistaken understanding of the position. We made the decision to avoid causing any offence we would deny sign-offs across the board, irrespective of the fees being forfeited.

​

​​

Q5) The money section of my Sunday paper has calculated that over the next 20 years, my adviser will cost my pension about £20,000 because of their fees

​

What a great shock headline without the caveats of the calculations...

​

Our income does not come at the cost of your fund's growth. Without us, you'd very likely not achieve that figure in the first place.

​

​

There is little chance you would have gained the quoted returns without us.

A good IFA will pay for themselves through the extra growth and mitigated tax achieved by their work and from which their client benefits.

Let's be frank about it; the more your funds grow, the more we’ve earned too as we have a financial interest in your success. Our success is your success.

​

​

Q6) Cash is better!

​

Cash has a place, of course. Be aware though;

​

Cash is not free - it is always below inflation, usually around 2% below as it currently stands. That is effectively the bank's fee. Which is quite expensive when considered, would you expressly pay 2% pa for cash account? Yet that is what we do.

​

The 5% Cash ISA awarded for £1000per month regular contributions for 1yr is great, but only 1 payment of the £1,000pm was in there for 1 year, so it really works out at less than 3% interest. Clever marketing.

​

Any asset type would be higher risk if that was the only asset you employed.

Diversification across a wide range of assets is a wise risk mitigation strategy.

​

Financial investments attract a landslide of self-proclaimed experts... every golf club appears to have a resident authority on the latest crypto position, gold outlook, shares to buy, etc. Yet would we trust them with our life savings?