Sanlam bags two firms to take assets over £2bn milestone

St James Place 2, one size fits all, well done regulators, its never been about choice or competition has it

People don't have to sell...

No you don't have to sell but with an uncertain future do you sell now or hold off for the next round of RDR which decimates a further chunk of the industry.

Advice is going to be a scare resource for many.

At some point we will see Agency Law come into play. These businesses are acting as agents and suppliers. Forget restricted vs independent, it is what the client thinks is happening that is important. The regulators won't take a lot of persuading that these issues need more work

English Mutual -40 + RIs who own the client relationship and the revenue streams thereof.....this will be interesting.

@ Bob

In your camp but with less of us about and fees going anywhere but up north perhaps they will be seen as the cleaver ones in the not to distant future?

So with a purchase of their advisory firm, clients will go from paying for the services of an IFA to a restricted adviser who has their own pre approved investment portfolios. What odds would you give that a 'meet your new adviser' meeting includes a statement that their existing portfolio cannot be adequately assessed for risk, and transferring to our in-house portfolios would allow ongoing risk management as well as re-ballancing? If you act now Mr Customer, we will reduce our normal fee!

Not SJP2 but Towry2.

@ Michael Brown; The cleaver ones loose their heads.

Dante

Dam spell checker. Clever ones me thinks?

Hikky

No they would not do that, would they?

Beware the unintended consequences of idealogical meddling with markets when the regulator clearly does not understand.

Still the small investor now has the services of MA's to fall back on, and they give the advice to go to Charities or Citizens advice.

I just might take them up on it?

What a mess it all is. Even we no longer understand the difference between all of the restricted adviser types that all come under one category.

What chance has poor old Mrs Miggins got with her £25k. Still the banks will give her the sort of advice she needs won't they?

I met a client who had been 'sold' to Sanlam and 'advised' to switch from three separate multi-asset funds into one of the three of them. Incidentally, whilst still relatively low risk - Cazenove MM Diversity - it did contain more equities than the two being sold. The 'recommendation' then went on to dramatically reduce the cash held in the off-shore bond, leaving it dangerously low, despite a quarterley income being taken and the various fees being paid for from that cash. Thus when the cash ran dry the client would be forced to sell units and pay an additional dealing charge! The 'recommendation' letter stated that this concentration into a single fund containing the highest proportion of equities and reduction in cash, would reduce the risk to the client!!!!

The portfolio was already being charged 1% renewal fee, (c. £500 pa), and for this advice the client was being charged a further £175!

I directed the client to write to Sanlam and reject the recommendation, refuse their fee and move adviser to a whole of market IFA.

I rarely comment on stories like this but I see that in an NMA story dated 24 Oct Sanlam was quoted as managing £300m and advising on £300m with 100 advisers. How did this then become £2.1b under management with the same 100 advisers. Even with these acquistions and a rise in the stockmarket something is wrong with the facts in this or the Oct story.

@YAYA-and I expect the selling IFA is being bonused with a share of the bps on the funds once transferred? Interesting how the principals "will retire from FS" and the clients are now gone to be farmed. A lot of sheep in Snowdonia.