Intelligent Money
Discussion
Bubbas Grill said:
Yes I am an IMPC. It appears I may not be up to speed. May I ask for your take on it all? Would be appreciated.
Read the post above which Julian has made twice in this thread, that makes the position of an IMPC clear both in terms of your assets and the service(s) available.Bubbas Grill said:
Yes I am an IMPC. It appears I may not be up to speed. May I ask for your take on it all? Would be appreciated.
The first thing is that your investments are safe, unless criminal activity is occuring and there is no evidence of this.My take is probably tainted by years working in this sector. I am not sure but it looks like all the complaints and issues don't relate to private client matters. I was a bit quick off the mark in an earlier post but there is a separation between those who use private client services and those who use IFAs to access Intelligent Money. Intelligent money and intelligent money private clients are different entities and offerings.
You've used a non advised service so do a bit of own your research, but I don't see a reason to run for the hills.
But then I'm just a bloke on the internet.
TownIdiot said:
Bubbas Grill said:
Yes I am an IMPC. It appears I may not be up to speed. May I ask for your take on it all? Would be appreciated.
The first thing is that your investments are safe, unless criminal activity is occuring and there is no evidence of this.My take is probably tainted by years working in this sector. I am not sure but it looks like all the complaints and issues don't relate to private client matters. I was a bit quick off the mark in an earlier post but there is a separation between those who use private client services and those who use IFAs to access Intelligent Money. Intelligent money and intelligent money private clients are different entities and offerings.
You've used a non advised service so do a bit of own your research, but I don't see a reason to run for the hills.
But then I'm just a bloke on the internet.
Odd as there was 100% a post here made this morning with a link to the FCA ruling from February.
I have the ruling open in another tab as I've been reading it.
This might be a silly question Adam but it was here and it isn't now - even if the author removed it how would you know if anything has been moderated?
I have the ruling open in another tab as I've been reading it.
This might be a silly question Adam but it was here and it isn't now - even if the author removed it how would you know if anything has been moderated?
I guess the question for existing and potentially clients of either IM or the private client business is do you trust them to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Forester1965 said:
I guess the question for existing and potentially clients of either IM or the private client business is do you trust them to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Disclosure: IMPC for 5 years.Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Do I trust them “ to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?”
Yes.
Money ‘feels’ perfectly safe to me.
I’ve met several of the folk there (thanks to some excellent sponsored events, as well as having ‘guidance’ on our financial plans confirmed by them): perfectly happy with them.
Never met anyone from Aviva/Fidelity/Vanguard or any of the other places we have funds squirrelled away, & I bet they have many, many more ‘complaints’ or issues….
Maybe you feel I’ve been duped, but the funds are doing well, it feels like a decent place to avoid high IFA fees.
Approaching the point where we ought to start drawing down on some of the funds….I guess that is where the rubber meets the road, but I have no concerns. I’ll be the first to let you know if they won’t give me my money
With regard to the regulated/non-regulated points raised, there is a requirement for the relevant disclosure of what activities are regulated and what are not;
Returning to the voluntary asset restriction, in simple terms, this is an agreement Intelligent Money Limited has entered into with the FCA not to dispose of any of its own assets without consent. It is not connected whatsoever to clients or their investments (this is client money, held by the trustee and nominees, separately to IM's own money).
An example of this is IM's decision to sell its Qualifying Workplace Pension Scheme (QWPS) business. IM had been in talks regarding this since last year and the deal was agreed at the beginning of the month. IM therefore sought FCA approval, which was granted, and the sale has now completed.
Whilst this asset restriction certainly impacts on the shareholders and directors of IM, it has no impact on clients (indeed, this is the entire point).
Cheers
Julian
- IM is a regulated product provider which undertakes regulated activities. It is therefore disclosed as such.
- IMPC is a non-regulated service provider whose services (information, guidance, support, research) are unregulated activities and are therefore disclosed as such.
Returning to the voluntary asset restriction, in simple terms, this is an agreement Intelligent Money Limited has entered into with the FCA not to dispose of any of its own assets without consent. It is not connected whatsoever to clients or their investments (this is client money, held by the trustee and nominees, separately to IM's own money).
An example of this is IM's decision to sell its Qualifying Workplace Pension Scheme (QWPS) business. IM had been in talks regarding this since last year and the deal was agreed at the beginning of the month. IM therefore sought FCA approval, which was granted, and the sale has now completed.
Whilst this asset restriction certainly impacts on the shareholders and directors of IM, it has no impact on clients (indeed, this is the entire point).
Cheers
Julian
Forester1965 said:
I guess the question for existing and potentially clients of either IM or the private client business is do you trust them to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Forester1965Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
mikeiow said:
Forester1965 said:
I guess the question for existing and potentially clients of either IM or the private client business is do you trust them to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Disclosure: IMPC for 5 years.Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Do I trust them “ to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?”
Yes.
Money ‘feels’ perfectly safe to me.
I’ve met several of the folk there (thanks to some excellent sponsored events, as well as having ‘guidance’ on our financial plans confirmed by them): perfectly happy with them.
Never met anyone from Aviva/Fidelity/Vanguard or any of the other places we have funds squirrelled away, & I bet they have many, many more ‘complaints’ or issues….
Maybe you feel I’ve been duped, but the funds are doing well, it feels like a decent place to avoid high IFA fees.
Approaching the point where we ought to start drawing down on some of the funds….I guess that is where the rubber meets the road, but I have no concerns. I’ll be the first to let you know if they won’t give me my money
As for the the post from Julian directly after, makes no difference to me; as it is already what I had understood the situation to be ..... and my position as continuing private client customer will for foreseeable future stay same.
mikeiow said:
Disclosure: IMPC for 5 years.
Do I trust them “ to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?”
Yes.
Money ‘feels’ perfectly safe to me.
I’ve met several of the folk there (thanks to some excellent sponsored events, as well as having ‘guidance’ on our financial plans confirmed by them): perfectly happy with them.
Never met anyone from Aviva/Fidelity/Vanguard or any of the other places we have funds squirrelled away, & I bet they have many, many more ‘complaints’ or issues….
Maybe you feel I’ve been duped, but the funds are doing well, it feels like a decent place to avoid high IFA fees.
Approaching the point where we ought to start drawing down on some of the funds….I guess that is where the rubber meets the road, but I have no concerns. I’ll be the first to let you know if they won’t give me my money
Should make clear, I wasn't suggesting your money is at risk of disappearing nefariously at the hands of IM (no reason to think it is). It was to ask whether IM pay sufficient diligence to trust the guidance they give you as a private client or through their provision of the SIPP.Do I trust them “ to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?”
Yes.
Money ‘feels’ perfectly safe to me.
I’ve met several of the folk there (thanks to some excellent sponsored events, as well as having ‘guidance’ on our financial plans confirmed by them): perfectly happy with them.
Never met anyone from Aviva/Fidelity/Vanguard or any of the other places we have funds squirrelled away, & I bet they have many, many more ‘complaints’ or issues….
Maybe you feel I’ve been duped, but the funds are doing well, it feels like a decent place to avoid high IFA fees.
Approaching the point where we ought to start drawing down on some of the funds….I guess that is where the rubber meets the road, but I have no concerns. I’ll be the first to let you know if they won’t give me my money
Some people will look at it and have no problem, which is their/your prerogative.
My point would be to keep eyes open and rely on independent sources of information (regulator, ombudsmen or courts) rather than any disgruntled or happy clients, competitors or the company itself in the course of PR activity.
JulianPH said:
Forester1965
As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
It sounds certainly be useful if people disclosed their situation when posting As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
But then, IFAs love a bit of non-disclosure
JulianPH said:
Forester1965 said:
I guess the question for existing and potentially clients of either IM or the private client business is do you trust them to act diligently to help you manage your money safely and effectively?
Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
Forester1965Two questions in my mind are whether IM has been negligent on a systemic basis (reportedly lots of claims in the pipeline, we don't know their veracity yet) and is there sufficient transparency? I note a public statement on here was promised for Thurs/Fri but it hasn't yet materialised.
As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
I’ve had my meagre savings with IMPC since 2020. In that time they’ve made themselves available to me when I’ve had questions, always been quick to process transactions and have even managed to turn my little pile of money into a slightly less little pile.
It’s good that this has brought to peoples attention, but let’s not forget that we are now hearing directly from the company owner - a man many people here have met personally.
I wonder how many other companies have similar current outstanding complaints. And of those companies, how many are speaking directly to their clients like this?
It’s good that this has brought to peoples attention, but let’s not forget that we are now hearing directly from the company owner - a man many people here have met personally.
I wonder how many other companies have similar current outstanding complaints. And of those companies, how many are speaking directly to their clients like this?
JulianPH said:
Forester1965
As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
I'm not a regulated individual. I haven't suggested any purposely untoward activity on behalf of IM and I am sticking to the facts. As a regulated financial adviser you should know better than to try and whip up worry or concern. It is very apparent here that you have an axe to grind.
Your speculative comments are quite incendiary and you would be wise to tone them down, stick to facts and work on the basis that they will be read by the FCA.
Unfortunately the financial advice market is peppered with examples of poor behaviour (you'll be fully aware of Active Wealth, I am sure). Consumers are sadly easy targets and so banging the drum for consumers treading carefully is good advice.
The facts to date are that your regulated company has been 'asked' by the regulator not to distribute its assets away of the company. This is typically, not always, to avoid the company phoenixing and leaving the tax payer to foot the bill for malpractice. IM has just lost a significant case with the ombudsman and faces what is reported to be another 80 cases.
However much PR you put on it, it's a serious situation and one existing and potential investors should be aware of. It's not secret or defamatory to point it out and I'm sure it'll come out in the wash.
For what it's worth I hope it's an isolated case because consumers don't deserve yet another failure.
I don't doubt that my money is safe although I'd like to know the process of extracting it should there be a 'situation'.
My irritation and worry is triggered when communications are promised within a certain time-frame and that doesn't happen.
On the plus side...Great work on the end result so thanks for that.
My irritation and worry is triggered when communications are promised within a certain time-frame and that doesn't happen.
On the plus side...Great work on the end result so thanks for that.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Am I imagining it or has the post that links to the FCA document I'm in the middle of reading disappeared?
Do you mean this post that's still there in the thread"You might need a login.
https://citywire.com/new-model-adviser/news/sipp-p...
FCA Register entry showing restrictions on the firm:
https://register.fca.org.uk/s/firm?" id=001b000000Mf...
Edited by Forester1965 on Wednesday 22 May 15:43
There's a lot of f
kwittery in this threadMy money is SAFE and PROTECTED with IMPC whatever the outcome of the potential cases
If Julian pulls my pants down and butt f
ks me I will drive down to the Algarve and sink his yacht :-) (at the very least) Julian I'll be the angry bloke with an even angrier wife alongside me.
She's just asked me what I'm chuckling at btw
Have a good weekend all
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Odd as there was 100% a post here made this morning with a link to the FCA ruling from February.
I have the ruling open in another tab as I've been reading it.
This might be a silly question Adam but it was here and it isn't now - even if the author removed it how would you know if anything has been moderated?
If you have the url for the link, post it up again. If your post gets deleted, let us know.I have the ruling open in another tab as I've been reading it.
This might be a silly question Adam but it was here and it isn't now - even if the author removed it how would you know if anything has been moderated?
Bubbas Grill said:
I don't doubt that my money is safe although I'd like to know the process of extracting it should there be a 'situation'.
My irritation and worry is triggered when communications are promised within a certain time-frame and that doesn't happen.
On the plus side...Great work on the end result so thanks for that.
Similar thoughts from me. My irritation and worry is triggered when communications are promised within a certain time-frame and that doesn't happen.
On the plus side...Great work on the end result so thanks for that.
I’ve lots and lots of reasons to be happy with how my investments through IM have gone (yup, I know stuff can go down as well as up etc) and I certainly appreciate the easy direct contact with folk behind the scenes when it comes to answering my numptie questions in simple terms I can understand so on that basis it would be a 10/10 recommendation (and has been) from me.
On that basis, whether there’s a bit of stirring or mischief making or not, like everyone else lI’d appreciate a simple explanation of “what it’s all about” from those in the know and have logged on for the past couple of days to read that and been a wee bit disappointed not to find anything that covers it.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff