55 year old with 300K lump sum to invest.

[Robzig]

Thanks Gerard for your valiant effort to explain.

If I (as the taxpayer's rep) am due 1% of the investment - in the parlance of this thread - I'm going to get the hump if I'm being short-changed by 99 cent!

Surely, it's not for the assurance company to decide what % of the 1% they are going to pay over!!?

With all their brain power, they may even be able to find a multiplier which brings the net 99% back to an even 100%.....

 

[Gordon Gekko]

Brilliant, I missed the clarification in the first post, went straight to the Table! I'm glad I didn't accuse you of doing a Marc

“doing a Marc”

You should copyright that.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

To avoid any confusion, and the subsequent references to 99.99%, I should have been explicit with my premium figure.

I don't know what methodology other providers use in the way they arrive at the investment 'premium' but the actuarial alchemy used by this provider is as follows :

Divide the €10,000 by 101% = €9,900.9901 and if you then apply the allocation of 101% to that 'premium' you're made whole again.

If you look at the policy cerificate it will state that the Single Premium excluding Levy is €9,900.99

Gerard

www.bond.ie

Although, as has been remarked before, this is all very trivial from the punter's perspective and a tad off topic, it is nonetheless interesting to nerds like myself. Like any self respecting duke I will admit that I have been wrong on this.
So the correct approach appears to be to treat this in a similar way to VAT. Thus if I buy something costing me €1.23, whilst it looks to me that is what the product cost, in fact the product cost €1.
Similarly if I pay €10,000 for a life product I have actually bought a product costing €9,900.99 and charged €99.01 levy - perfectly legitimate. The 1% extra allocation on the €9,900.99 precisely cancels the levy.

 

[Robzig]

Ah - that makes sense.

Of course, now I have another reason to wonder why @Steven Barrett had a go at the life office?

 

[GSheehy]

Folks, there's a bit of the auld hounding going on in the past while that seem to be purely based on the fact that if you're (still) in the industry and post in your own name then you're not allowed to make a mistake. There's also a certain 'delight' taken in correcting a simple enough error.

It just needs to stop.

 

[JimmyB99]

Well said @GSheehy - mtk's appeal for civility didn't get very far with some. Disappointing behaviour indeed.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@

Folks, there's a bit of the auld hounding going on in the past while that seem to be purely based on the fact that if you're (still) in the industry and post in your own name then you're not allowed to make a mistake. There's also a certain 'delight' taken in correcting a simple enough error.

It just needs to stop.

I agree that the attacks on @Steven Barrett are totally out of order. He admitted to an incident in the past which I think he now sees as being a bit OTT - and yet he was pounced upon. Bad form.*

@Marc made an incorrect statement and when I questioned it in a totally civil manner he defended it, and has not withdrawn it even yet. I think he drew the subsequent flack on himself.

* Edited - my bad

 

[JimmyB99]

Sounds like a desperate attempt there, Duke

Steven made no mistake so when GSheehy was referring to not being allowed to make a mistake, he wasn't referring to Steven. But I think you already know that.

The "doing a Marc" bit is way out of line and not in the least civil.

 

[ClubMan]

To avoid any confusion, and the subsequent references to 99.99%, I should have been explicit with my premium figure.

I don't know what methodology other providers use in the way they arrive at the investment 'premium' but the actuarial alchemy used by this provider is as follows :

Divide the €10,000 by 101% = €9,900.9901 and if you then apply the allocation of 101% to that 'premium' you're made whole again.

If you look at the policy cerificate it will state that the Single Premium excluding Levy is €9,900.99

Gerard

www.bond.ie

This is confusing, and maybe incorrect?
Surely it's....

Customer invests €10,000
1% levy is €100
Investment net of levy €9,900
Underwriter adds 1% (of €9,900) = €99
Actual amount invested on behalf of customer is €9,999 so 0.01% short of their original investment.

 

[Sarenco]

This is confusing, and maybe incorrect?
Surely it's....

Actually, I think Duke’s VAT analogy is a good one.

The punter isn’t actually investing exactly €10k - he’s investing €9,900.99 and paying a levy of €99.01.

If he wanted to invest exactly €10k he would have to make a payment of €10,100 to the life company.

With apologies to the OP, I’m conscious that we have taken your thread completely off track with irrelevant wonkishness.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

This is confusing, and maybe incorrect?
Surely it's....

Customer invests €10,000
1% levy is €100
Investment net of levy €9,900
Underwriter adds 1% (of €9,900) = €99
Actual amount invested on behalf of customer is €9,999 so 0.01% short of their original investment.

Sorry, but at risk of being condemned by the morality police, that is wrong. I am sure @Marc is really pleased by the righteous brigade's patronising defence. Maybe he would prefer if they supported his claim. I actually thought that they included the gratuitous attack on @Steven Barrett, but no it is a selective indignation.

Customer pays €10,000
That is €9,900.99 for an insurance policy and €99.01 levy.
Add 1% extra allocation to €9,900.99 to give €10,000 worth of an investment.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Actually, I think Duke’s VAT analogy is a good one.

The punter isn’t actually investing exactly €10k - he’s investing €9,900.99 and paying a levy of €99.01.

If he wanted to invest exactly €10k he would have to make a payment of €10,100 to the life company.

With apologies to the OP, I’m conscious that we have taken your thread completely off track with irrelevant wonkishness.

It is also consistent with the motor insurance levy. The punter is charged premium + 3% levy. If the insurance company had to hand over 3% of the punter's total payment that would mean a levy on the levy. The key is that the levy is a charge on the punter with the insurance company defined as the "collection agent".

 

[Robzig]

@

I agree that the attacks on @Steven Barrett are totally out of order. He admitted to an incident in the past which I think he now sees as being a bit OTT - and yet he was pounced upon. Bad form.

Just seeing this now. @Steven Barrett - it was not my attention to "attack" you at all and certainly not in a manner that was "totally out of order".

Reading back on my posts, I don't think I did what I'm being accused of. However, if you feel that what I wrote was unfair or unreasonable, I apologise. For the record, I think you are a great contributor to this site and I wish you all the best.

 

[Steven Barrett]

Just seeing this now. @Steven Barrett - it was not my attention to "attack" you at all and certainly not in a manner that was "totally out of order".

Reading back on my posts, I don't think I did what I'm being accused of. However, if you feel that what I wrote was unfair or unreasonable, I apologise. For the record, I think you are a great contributor to this site and I wish you all the best.

I didn't take any offence and was a bit surprised to log on yesterday morning to read that some people accused you of attacking me. Nothing to apologise for.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Robzig @Steven Barrett @JimmyB99
Mea Culpa
Post amended.

 

[Robzig]

Thanks Steven

That really was not nice, Duke - seriously unimpressed

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Thanks Steven

That really was not nice, Duke - seriously unimpressed

I see you are a new boy/girl. You will get used to it
Tone down the sarcasm ("in the parlance of this thread - take the hump (parodying Steven?)", "with all their brain power...").
We don't do sarcasm here.

What I didn't get is why a financial adviser would get the hump regarding a one-off charge of 0.01% when most financial advisers I've come across have tried to charge me an on-going charge of 0.50% p.a.?!

Maybe I have become too cynical but I took this as a sarky swipe at Steven who had used the term "hump". I still think that is what you meant but Steven has either not taken it that way or he has taken the mature approach of letting such puerile sarcasm be water off a duck's back.

 

[Steven Barrett]

I see you are a new boy/girl. You will get used to it
Tone down the sarcasm ("in the parlance of this thread - take the hump (parodying Steven?)", "with all their brain power...").
We don't do sarcasm here.

Maybe I have become too cynical but I took this at a sarky swipe at Steven who had used the term "hump". I still think that is what you meant but Steven has either not taken it that way or he has taken the mature approach of letting such puerile sarcasm be water off a duck's back".

To be honest Duke, when I saw it, this thread was locked, so I couldn't reply. I don't care either way and am not bothered at this stage.

 

[Itchy]

And peace be with you all...

However the real offending in this thread is the center - aligned text in the OP, reprobable behaviour

Personal details
Age: 55
Spouse’s/Partner's age: 45
Number and age of children: 3 (12,10,7)
Income and expenditure
Annual gross income from employment or profession: 65K
Annual gross income of spouse: zero
Monthly take-home pay €4000
Type of employment: Permanent in Pharmaceuticals
In general are you: Saving ~€500 per month

Summary of Assets and Liabilities
Family home worth €400k with no mortgage
Cash of €300k
Defined Contribution pension fund: Zero
Company shares : zero
Other Property: None

Family home mortgage information
None

Other borrowings – car loans/personal loans etc

Do you pay off your full credit card balance each month? Yes
Buy to let properties
None
Other savings and investments:
Do you have a pension scheme? Company pension fund ?220K
Other information which might be relevant
Life insurance: None
What specific question do you have or what issues are of concern to you?​

Hi All, I’m looking for somewhere to invest a lump sum of 300K while minimising Annual Management and other charges. Does anyone have any suggestions? Risk appetite of Irish Life Map 4 / Zurich Prisma 4.

 

[Uafásach]

100k in Raisin perhaps

€100k in Raisin Bank @ 3% (12mth term) will leave you with €2,010 after DIRT. Pay for the guts of a family holiday.

Ireland have very few options of lump sums...it would seem!

You are maxing the pension AVCs. That seems to be the best show in town!