# A cautionary tale



## Homer (15 Oct 2003)

Visit this website to see what happens when you don't take your customers' complaints seriously enough. 

www.badpension.com

Regards
Homer


----------



## daltonr (15 Oct 2003)

Brilliant.

I presume someone will be along any minute to call him a skinflint.  Imagine being upset that it will take him until he's 132 years old just to recoup the charges.

Is my favourite bit this....
"The present value is purely the result of fund performance – charges do not have that much effect on it.”"

or this...
"The Press always have [sic] this image of ‘Commission Greedy Salesmen’ – they always use that phrase.  And they have created the situation [i.e. distrust of financial services]  and they are really responsible for what has gone on – the Financial Press……”"

It's all good.

-Rd


----------



## Brendan Burgess (15 Oct 2003)

If, like me, you have an aversion to unflagged PDF or Powerpoint downloads, this Powerpoint presentation is worth clicking on.

It's a unique form of presentation which could be replicated elsewhere.

Brendan


----------



## daltonr (15 Oct 2003)

Right-Clicking on the Link and selecting Save-As 
should be better than clicking directly on the link.
You'll be able to keep surfing while it downloads in the background.

Left clicking sometimes locks up the browser while you're downloading.

Well worth getting your hands on though.

-Rd


----------



## Laser (15 Oct 2003)

*Very Amusing*

Good on Kirby. Pity we didn't have more like him here to come out and openly take on the abusive product provider, except skinflints blathering on about 5% on a €100 per month PRSA.


----------



## Savy (15 Oct 2003)

*Re: Very Amusing*

*Yawn* 

Laser, you have gone beyond the point of being boring......
|I 

S


----------



## Laser (15 Oct 2003)

*Oh I don't Know*

Just countering the usual one-sided gunk on AAM, this one being an attempt to cast a dark halo over Irish advisors by picking up an extreme UK example. BTW Savy is spelt Savvy. Brian would have a fit.


----------



## daltonr (16 Oct 2003)

*Re: Oh I don't Know*

    ...   :rolleyes    ...   :\    ...   |I


----------



## Homer (16 Oct 2003)

*Re: Oh I don't Know*

Hi Laser

I didn't have any agenda when I posted the address of this website other than to show what can happen when a company underestimates the influence that one dissatisfied customer can have.  I bet Ray now wishes he had taken the complaint more seriously.

I also found the PowerPoint presentation very entertaining and thought that it brought some light relief to what can be a tedious subject and showed that you don't have to be solemn in order to make a serious point.

And for what it’s worth, I think the PRSA model is seriously flawed.  There is no way that standard PRSA charges will support the level of advice required by most people in order to make a properly informed decision.  And, as pensions tend to be sold rather than bought, the level of take up is likely to fall disastrously short of the targets set by the Pensions Board.

Having said that, I think there is room for an execution only model for those people who are sufficiently financially sophisticated to make a decision without requiring expert help.  As to how many people fall into that category, your guess is as good as mine, maybe better if you work in that area.

There is always a conflict between the cost of advice and the value of that advice to the recipient.  There is no doubt that many people end up making ill-informed decisions based on something a friend told them, something they heard in the pub, etc. etc.  There are also many cases of people being ripped off by unscrupulous advisors who put their own interests ahead of their clients’ interests.

We’re probably never going to eliminate either of the above and can only hope that the middle ground can flourish – those who are equipped to make proper decisions doing so without incurring unnecessary costs; those who need professional advice getting the right advice at an appropriate price.

Regards
Homer


----------



## daltonr (16 Oct 2003)

*Re: Oh I don't Know*

Homer, 

I'm not sure if you've managed to catch any of Laser's earlier posts.  But it appears that making reasonable points like you did in your last post doesn't seem to be the best appraoch.

He has a habit of popping up in threads, and claiming that the threads are attacks on Irish Financial advisers, such as his claim on this thread (even though he's the only one to mention Irish advisers).

BTW, I tend to agree that PRSA's lend themselves better both to execution only.  I also think that 1% probably isn't enough to pay fund managers to actively manage a fund so PRSA's could end up being tracker based.  I'm also of the opinion that that might not be the worst thing in the world.  But others disagree with me on the last point.

-Rd
(AAM Chief Skinflint - Apparently)


----------



## badly bitten (16 Oct 2003)

Re Laser's comments..

I took on the fund mismanager (of a company at least as well known as Steve Kirby's) after learning that the 51,500 Euro I had paid in over 11 annual contributions (1993 - 2003) had earned 688 Euro. Here are some of the responses:

Customer Relations Assistant: Direct debit forms (x 3 November to February)
Customer Relations Manager, explaining (after I had contacted the Ombudsman): "the performance of your fund is in fact normal"
Broker/ Financial Adviser: "You got tax relief on it, didn't you?"

I will post again when I hear from the Ombudsman.


----------



## Laser (16 Oct 2003)

*About time*

You know that's the first time a skinflint has admitted to accepting my argument - thanks to Homer's insightful and clearly informed post.

Execution only could be as cheap as the market will bear- even less than 1% amc and nothing upfront. But what I've always objected to was the attempt to transfer this loopy pricing by armchair generals into the advisory market. I called these the Skinflints just to get their attention and use the tactics often applied on AAM to describe professional advisors. Skinflints is catching on.

The facts are that the UK model of 1% has failed Stakeholders, and finally the Regulator is coming around to understanding that (a) people want advice, and (b) it must be reasonably paid for. Large players like Norwich Union have bluntly told the Govt that it has to pull out unless the cap is lifted.

In Ireland, with appallingly low volumes and an effective cap at the "Standard", players are losing lumps of money, and advisors aren't advising/selling because they're not being paid in many cases for low income  business. It's a mess, with zero chance of pulling the missing 500,000 into the net.

Against this background I jumped at contributors on AAM who, in the face of initially reasoned conter-argument, persisted with their prejudical dogma of trackers for all, cheapest is best, advisors aren't needed, and all the other baloney that got us into the stupid position of intervening in a free market with pricing models.

Time and again its been proven that simplistic though well meaning interference backfires. It's happening here and in the UK. 

Unadjusted, the propagation of the cheapest is best dogma is ultimately self-defeating and damaging if it gains credence. It won't get 500,000 fellow citizens to buy a pension. End of Story. And if Daltonr feels miffed somewhat, perhaps he'll understand why if he reflects on the bigger issue. Doh!


----------



## Caius Martius (16 Oct 2003)

*Link*

Daltonr,

Your reaction to something that has been doing the rounds for quite some time now is akin a dog with a new bone.

I believe that there is no malice in Homers post as he/she is just bringing something, that we are all aware of, to everyones attention in computer presentable format.

Laser doesn't need me to tell him/her that he/she is correct in his/her analysis of the actual advisor and direct market but I find the posts very informed and entertaining. Even your site's founder has described his/her language as 'colourful'.

I would suggest to you that you do a search on all of Lasers posts and take the time to study the implications of same. Who knows, you might even post a suggestion in the relevant forum that the site dedicate a whole topic to LASER - THE BEST OF AAM :lol


----------



## daltonr (16 Oct 2003)

*Re: About time*



> in the face of initially reasoned conter-argument,



I've heard it all now.
:rollin  

I suggest that on that Comical Ali like bit of Revisionism you make your exit while the crowd are still laughing.

Caius, I don't understand your post at all!  I don't know where you got the idea that I thought there was malice in Homers post!  Pardon my cycnicism but given Lasers tendancy to use multiple names.  I'm a little suspicious.

regards

-Rd


----------



## rainyday (16 Oct 2003)

*Re: About time*



> you might even post a suggestion in the relevant forum that the site dedicate a whole topic to LASER - THE BEST OF AAM


Or better still, give Laser a whole website of his own, where he can rant away to his heart's content!

Only joking of course, Laser's non-offensive contributions are welcome.


----------



## Laser (16 Oct 2003)

*Above*

Sure I'm just f*!"^n great really. You should see me when I've a few on board!


----------



## CouldntGetAUsename (16 Oct 2003)

*Laser*

Why don't you just register?

CGAN.


----------



## CouldntGetAUsername (16 Oct 2003)

*Damn*

Feckin' laptop keyboard.
Makes my last post funny.
Question is the same though.

CGAN.


----------



## Laser (17 Oct 2003)

*Ah Sure*

Sure who says I'm not with my alter ego - Clubman.


----------



## daltonr (17 Oct 2003)

*Re: Ah Sure*

Loser, 

Delusions of grandeur now?
Where will it all end.

-Rd


----------

