St. James' Place - a review…
Discussion
greygoose said:
Do you work for them?
I asked if OddCat has any links to SJP on another thread as the defence seemed a bit too strong and the answer was (in part)."I've never worked for SJP nor ever been a financial adviser. Im actually retired now. I was though some years ago involved in the admin side of setting up and running a new SJP partner practice so, yes, you could say I have at least some 'inside' knowledge."
funinhounslow said:
Like I suggested earlier why not just get a couple of boring Vanguard index trackers?
To be fair this is very easy to say when you know what a Vanguard index tracker is and where to start.I'm the sort of person who is inquisitive or sad enough to spend time figuring it out.
A lot of people aren't so I can understand the lure of someone offering to do it all for you and manage your "wealth".
What I can't understand is burying your head in the sand insisting they're good value for money when there's plenty of evidence to the contrary including them changing their own business model because even they seem to have realised their model is outdated.
Worth a watch.
funinhounslow said:
From the article linked above:
(Fees) would reduce the returns from a £100,000 investment into an open-ended fund growing at 5 per cent a year by about 2.2 percentage points annually.
That is not just “more expensive” it’s daylight robbery.
And if you twig in the first few years and want out, they help themselves to an “exit charge” before returning your money… Though in fairness this is being abolished next year
Like I suggested earlier why not just get a couple of boring Vanguard index trackers?
So you don't agree that people should be able to pay whatever that want for stuff ? And to decide for themselves whether they are getting value for money ? (Fees) would reduce the returns from a £100,000 investment into an open-ended fund growing at 5 per cent a year by about 2.2 percentage points annually.
That is not just “more expensive” it’s daylight robbery.
And if you twig in the first few years and want out, they help themselves to an “exit charge” before returning your money… Though in fairness this is being abolished next year
Like I suggested earlier why not just get a couple of boring Vanguard index trackers?
The 'exit fee' is in lieu of an initial fee (although they still state a convoluted equivalent hypothetical initial fee as they are obliged to do that). Instead of paying it on the way in you pay on the way out if you don't stick around for 6 years. Which is fair enough. Imagine if they did a complex (and expensive to make happen) defined benefit pension transfer. 100% of the money is invested. Then the punter decides a week later to transfer it to his mates IFA practice. His mate doesn't do defined benefit transfers so couldn't do it for him....
Re the charging for not servicing, that is poor but is being addressed and redress paid where appropriate. Difficult to say fairer than that. WhT more do you expect them to do ? This, by the way, is the tip of an iceberg where loads of other advice businesses are going to get similarly hamnered over the same issue. SJP are just the first and biggest.
I think the main (and only) issue with SJP is the poor performance of the investment funds. Which benefits SJP not one bit as both they, and their clients, would be better off if the investment performance was better. In fact, if their funds were all top quartile and smashing it, people wouldn't care if their charges were 1%, 1.5% or 2%.
OddCat said:
Just to be clear. I'm not an SJP fan boy. I don't have a dog in this fight.
SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
You are repeatedly twisting what others write on this thread and posting outright lies to make the company seem better than they are.SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
Your claim above, for example, that exit fees were instead of initial fees is simply not true, they were in addition to.
Your “balance” is lying.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:funinhounslow said:
Like I suggested earlier why not just get a couple of boring Vanguard index trackers?
To be fair this is very easy to say when you know what a Vanguard index tracker is and where to start.
(I also quit drinking 12 years ago as a result of the “365 days without booze” thread on the health subforum. )
Pistonheads has literally changed my life…
OddCat said:
Just to be clear. I'm not an SJP fan boy. I don't have a dog in this fight.
SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
I do agree with you, actually. There are some good advisors there and many people may not have met other advisors In their busy lives, better to have a quite expensive pension than none at all and you would be bloody glad of the highly polished sales advice when you claim your £500k critical illness claim when you need the money or the widow paying off the mortgage with the properly set up life insurance, in trust etc.SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
I had a GAN pension at 18 and they got slated for high charges too but I am flipping glad I was interrupted by that advisor all those years ago. I also have a GAN critical illness cover which would pay out on things that no modern critical illness cover would due to the early definitions. It cost peanuts as the cost was set age 21, I’m now 50 and the premiums are still the same for 400k of cover plus some income replacement included.
OddCat said:
So you don't agree that people should be able to pay whatever that want for stuff ? And to decide for themselves whether they are getting value for money ?
I'm fine with that if people are adequately equipped to assess the VFM.When the client base includes a little old lady who lives next to my mum, "likes the flowers they are bought for their birthday and Christmas" and can't join the dots about who is paying for them then no, I don't agree.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:funinhounslow said:
Like I suggested earlier why not just get a couple of boring Vanguard index trackers?
To be fair this is very easy to say when you know what a Vanguard index tracker is and where to start.I would imagine a lot of SJP customers probably need schemes which minimise tax as they’ll have amounts beyond pensions and ISAs and they’d need to minimise IHT liability.
Ken_Code said:
OddCat said:
Just to be clear. I'm not an SJP fan boy. I don't have a dog in this fight.
SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
You are repeatedly twisting what others write on this thread and posting outright lies to make the company seem better than they are.SJP are far from perfect but they are no where near as bad as haters make out. I'm just trying to provide some balance - but I can tell that I'm wasting my time.
Your claim above, for example, that exit fees were instead of initial fees is simply not true, they were in addition to.
Your “balance” is lying.
They have to state the exit fee in terms of an initial fee equivalent because the FCA require disclosure of initial fees. The exit fee is in lieu of an initial fee but they have none the less to backwardise it as an initial fee in the guff as that's what it is (but done differently).
What actually happens is that products with no physical initial fee and, as a consequence, with an exit fee instead (eg a pension) have annual fees around 0.25% higher than products which do have a physical initial fee (eg an ISA). So you pay in the long run. Because if you neither paid up front, nor exited early and paid an exit fee, you'd never have paid any fee for the initial advice. How many IFAs set stuff up for their clients for free ?
What did you get charged on your SJP product ? Wait, what ? You never had one ? You sound like one of those people who say TVRs are horrible unreliable but have never owned one
. I have, and it wasn't.OddCat said:
They are NOT. I've literally had one of these products myself. And I have an understanding of SJP charges that exceeds that of most people working for SJP let alone people on here.
They have to state the exit fee in terms of an initial fee equivalent because the FCA require disclosure of initial fees. The exit fee is in lieu of an initial fee but they have none the less to backwardise it as an initial fee in the guff as that's what it is (but done differently).
What actually happens is that products with no physical initial fee and, as a consequence, with an exit fee instead (eg a pension) have annual fees around 0.25% higher than products which do have a physical initial fee (eg an ISA). So you pay in the long run. Because if you neither paid up front, nor exited early and paid an exit fee, you'd never have paid any fee for the initial advice. How many IFAs set stuff up for their clients for free ?
What did you get charged on your SJP product ? Wait, what ? You never had one ? You sound like one of those people who say TVRs are horrible unreliable but have never owned one. I have, and it wasn't.
So despite your repeated claims to not have a “dog in this fight”, it turns out that you were an investor with them as well as having worked with them.They have to state the exit fee in terms of an initial fee equivalent because the FCA require disclosure of initial fees. The exit fee is in lieu of an initial fee but they have none the less to backwardise it as an initial fee in the guff as that's what it is (but done differently).
What actually happens is that products with no physical initial fee and, as a consequence, with an exit fee instead (eg a pension) have annual fees around 0.25% higher than products which do have a physical initial fee (eg an ISA). So you pay in the long run. Because if you neither paid up front, nor exited early and paid an exit fee, you'd never have paid any fee for the initial advice. How many IFAs set stuff up for their clients for free ?
What did you get charged on your SJP product ? Wait, what ? You never had one ? You sound like one of those people who say TVRs are horrible unreliable but have never owned one
. I have, and it wasn't.So two more lies.
Do you not realise how ridiculous you are making yourself look here, shilling for a rip-off firm that hit rich fleecing investors?
I hope at least you were well paid in exchange for this rubbish.
OddCat said:
What actually happens is that products with no physical initial fee and, as a consequence, with an exit fee instead (eg a pension)
From https://www.sjp.co.uk/individuals/charges/pensions..."Product charges
There will be an initial product charge of 1.5% of your investment."
"Advice charges
We charge for our initial advice and for our ongoing advice. 4.5% of your initial investment will be used to pay for initial advice"
Presumably fees =/= charges, and hence the document at this link is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand?
xeny said:
From https://www.sjp.co.uk/individuals/charges/pensions...
"Product charges
There will be an initial product charge of 1.5% of your investment."
"Advice charges
We charge for our initial advice and for our ongoing advice. 4.5% of your initial investment will be used to pay for initial advice"
Presumably fees =/= charges, and hence the document at this link is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand?
It’s hard to understand why he’s posting such easy to disprove lies."Product charges
There will be an initial product charge of 1.5% of your investment."
"Advice charges
We charge for our initial advice and for our ongoing advice. 4.5% of your initial investment will be used to pay for initial advice"
Presumably fees =/= charges, and hence the document at this link is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand?
Ken_Code said:
xeny said:
From https://www.sjp.co.uk/individuals/charges/pensions...
"Product charges
There will be an initial product charge of 1.5% of your investment."
"Advice charges
We charge for our initial advice and for our ongoing advice. 4.5% of your initial investment will be used to pay for initial advice"
Presumably fees =/= charges, and hence the document at this link is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand?
It’s hard to understand why he’s posting such easy to disprove lies."Product charges
There will be an initial product charge of 1.5% of your investment."
"Advice charges
We charge for our initial advice and for our ongoing advice. 4.5% of your initial investment will be used to pay for initial advice"
Presumably fees =/= charges, and hence the document at this link is clear, unambiguous and easy to understand?
Caddyshack said:
He explained that the exit fees are expressed as entry fees, that does ring a bell when I challenged a friend on the charges. I think they do only apply if you withdraw money early.
The whole idea of exit fees is ludicrous.If you were investing in an infrastructure project or a start-up they may make sense but given that investments are mainly into liquid stocks there is no justification for it.
Ken_Code said:
Caddyshack said:
He explained that the exit fees are expressed as entry fees, that does ring a bell when I challenged a friend on the charges. I think they do only apply if you withdraw money early.
The whole idea of exit fees is ludicrous.If you were investing in an infrastructure project or a start-up they may make sense but given that investments are mainly into liquid stocks there is no justification for it.
We also used to see 107% allocation on bonds to overcome entry costs as long as held for 5 yrs, that could be seen as an exit penalty in some ways.
mikef said:
OddCat said:
greygoose said:
OddCat said:
So the main issue for the SJP haters on here is that SJP are more expensive than similar services elsewhere?
Do you work for them? Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff