St. James' Place - a review…
Discussion
Rushjob said:
DoubleSix said:
okgo said:
He actually appears to be saying that the SJP rep is now saying the DCA approach he himself initially pushed was the wrong one and blaming the client, no?
I read it as the adviser explaining that a phased investment strategy has impacted performance (against a benchmark) and the client sees this as an “excuse” rather than a rational explanation.Anyone who invested in February 2020, but on a phased basis, will be thinking "thank god I did that"....
Rushjob said:
DoubleSix said:
okgo said:
He actually appears to be saying that the SJP rep is now saying the DCA approach he himself initially pushed was the wrong one and blaming the client, no?
I read it as the adviser explaining that a phased investment strategy has impacted performance (against a benchmark) and the client sees this as an “excuse” rather than a rational explanation.There are risks to strategies and choices. The advisers job is to explain these risks. The clients role is to bear them.
A good adviser will tell you openly and honestly all the pros and cons. There is often no entirely right or wrong way to do things. Very true with phasing for example. The other issue is over promising and then under delivering. If things weren't made clear then you haven't been well advised.
People do ha e selected memory though.
I read a case recently in the news where a lady was complaining about equity release advice she'd received. The thrust was that she said she shouldn't have been allowed to do it because she had plenty of money and had no need. FOS found that, at the point of the equity release, she had no money and used a chunk of the equity release to clear the existing mortgage and other debts. She was then left with a sum to enjoy. It was this sum that she was saying was "the money I already had"
Basically, clients are quick to find someone else at fault when things don't go their way. Or when they realise that they would have been better off with a different choice. If things go well it is "as expected". If they don't the adviser is the villain.
I read a case recently in the news where a lady was complaining about equity release advice she'd received. The thrust was that she said she shouldn't have been allowed to do it because she had plenty of money and had no need. FOS found that, at the point of the equity release, she had no money and used a chunk of the equity release to clear the existing mortgage and other debts. She was then left with a sum to enjoy. It was this sum that she was saying was "the money I already had"
Basically, clients are quick to find someone else at fault when things don't go their way. Or when they realise that they would have been better off with a different choice. If things go well it is "as expected". If they don't the adviser is the villain.
IJWS15 said:
In the process of moving away from SJP. Used them to consolidate pensions 4 years ago.
I cited poor performance to our advisor.
He has come up with a reason why our investments didn’t do well in the first year, instead of investing everything at once they advised us to trickle the money in over a year ………. We (being new to this at the time) followed their advice which he now appears to be saying was wrong!
Haven’t pointed this out to him yet, nor have I taken issue with the seminar at which we were offered places (at his cost) when it is really funded from the charges.
Waiting for some information from Close Bros but Fisher charges seem to be in line with SJP. Close say they will discount fees as I am an employer introduction.
Starting to think I just dump everything in my live Aviva pension and put it into a tracker and save the fees.
SJP charges aren’t the most expensive out there but in isolation that’s not the point. I cited poor performance to our advisor.
He has come up with a reason why our investments didn’t do well in the first year, instead of investing everything at once they advised us to trickle the money in over a year ………. We (being new to this at the time) followed their advice which he now appears to be saying was wrong!
Haven’t pointed this out to him yet, nor have I taken issue with the seminar at which we were offered places (at his cost) when it is really funded from the charges.
Waiting for some information from Close Bros but Fisher charges seem to be in line with SJP. Close say they will discount fees as I am an employer introduction.
Starting to think I just dump everything in my live Aviva pension and put it into a tracker and save the fees.
If their returns were market leading then there might be some justification.
None of the larger firms other than perhaps Rathbones seem to offer sliding scale levels of charges but again difficult to see the comparison nett with then their results.
Clearly ( and consistently ) no love for SJP amongst the non Indy,’s but who would people actually recommend talking to as an alternative ?
alscar said:
SJP charges aren’t the most expensive out there but in isolation that’s not the point.
If their returns were market leading then there might be some justification.
None of the larger firms other than perhaps Rathbones seem to offer sliding scale levels of charges but again difficult to see the comparison nett with then their results.
Clearly ( and consistently ) no love for SJP amongst the non Indy,’s but who would people actually recommend talking to as an alternative ?
My guidance would be to avoid the temptation to look at the name above the door and look at the experience and qualifications of the individual.If their returns were market leading then there might be some justification.
None of the larger firms other than perhaps Rathbones seem to offer sliding scale levels of charges but again difficult to see the comparison nett with then their results.
Clearly ( and consistently ) no love for SJP amongst the non Indy,’s but who would people actually recommend talking to as an alternative ?
As I have said many times on these pages; the basic entry requirements to be an IFA are not particularly strenuous, but there is great scope beyond those basic requirements to become expert in the field.
I have known strong advisers at weak firms and weak advisers at strong firms.
Having said that, should a friend ask me the same question I would always guide towards independence as the key filter and steer away from restricted advice models. But thats another subject…
Edited by DoubleSix on Monday 16th October 22:06
I don't know whether there was a continuation connection, but St. James' Place is following two other business, which also used the identical business model.
Hambros Life, followed by Allied Dunbar (nicknamed allied crowbar).
As with quite a few financial organisations, you often do better as a shareholder, than a customer.
DoubleSix said:
My guidance would be to avoid the temptation to look at the name above the door and look at the experience and qualifications of the individual.
As I have said many times on these pages; the basic entry requirements to be an IFA are not particularly strenuous, but there is great scope beyond those basic requirements to become expert in the field.
I have known strong advisers at weak firms and weak advisers at strong firms.
Having said that, should a friend ask me the same question I would always guide towards independence as the key filter and steer away from restricted advice models. But thats another subject…
Thanks D6 - Independent seems the better route albeit not a simple or quick research. As I have said many times on these pages; the basic entry requirements to be an IFA are not particularly strenuous, but there is great scope beyond those basic requirements to become expert in the field.
I have known strong advisers at weak firms and weak advisers at strong firms.
Having said that, should a friend ask me the same question I would always guide towards independence as the key filter and steer away from restricted advice models. But thats another subject…
Edited by DoubleSix on Monday 16th October 22:06
Ed Moses said:
But the changes don’t take place / finalise for a couple of years and as ever devil will be in the detail. Their “ chief client and reputation “ person notes that they will continue to offer good value for money - only if their Dogs and general returns suddenly become decent presumably ?!
Changing the charge structure for incoming Pension transfers from back to front end paradoxically would have persuaded me not to transfer both of mine though.
Alickadoo said:
Surely the sensible place is Vanguard or A J Bell?
It assumes you're confident around what to do.I have a decent chunk with Vanguard and IWeb and they're absolutely fine and dirt cheap as platforms.
But they're not "advice" and I think that's where a lot of people struggle rightly or wrongly.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: It assumes you're confident around what to do.
I have a decent chunk with Vanguard and IWeb and they're absolutely fine and dirt cheap as platforms.
But they're not "advice" and I think that's where a lot of people struggle rightly or wrongly.
I’m in a number of camps - fairly confident with self picking Funds ( largely with Columbia and M&G ) and also have a Pot with IM. I have a decent chunk with Vanguard and IWeb and they're absolutely fine and dirt cheap as platforms.
But they're not "advice" and I think that's where a lot of people struggle rightly or wrongly.
My private Pensions are both invested via SJP and nett returns have been very acceptable in one and ok in the other but I also have a pot of IIB’s with them.
Trying to sort / run Pensions and IIB’s myself with no advice wasn’t something I was at all confident with !
Sharing positive news amidst the negativity about SJP. In mid-2022, we decided to invest in a corporate investment ( already had pensions and ISA’s ) due to low business bank interest rates. Following their advice, we opened a corporate investment alongside ISAs and pensions for my wife and me. After charges, here are our 2023 returns:
- ISA: Both wife and I returned +9.4%
- Pensions: Wife +8.9%, Me +5.4%
- Corporate Investment: +9%
Content with the outcomes.
- ISA: Both wife and I returned +9.4%
- Pensions: Wife +8.9%, Me +5.4%
- Corporate Investment: +9%
Content with the outcomes.
Chipper said:
Sharing positive news amidst the negativity about SJP. In mid-2022, we decided to invest in a corporate investment ( already had pensions and ISA’s ) due to low business bank interest rates. Following their advice, we opened a corporate investment alongside ISAs and pensions for my wife and me. After charges, here are our 2023 returns:
- ISA: Both wife and I returned +9.4%
- Pensions: Wife +8.9%, Me +5.4%
- Corporate Investment: +9%
Content with the outcomes.
You might want to look at this thread then:- ISA: Both wife and I returned +9.4%
- Pensions: Wife +8.9%, Me +5.4%
- Corporate Investment: +9%
Content with the outcomes.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Even a Vanguard Global Tracker managed 14%. Excessive fees require excessive performance.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff