The script that helps SJP’s smooth-talkers win clients

Financial Planning at its finest....

Why is this news? Other than not researching the potential client very well, it looks like a well put together script offering a service which lots of clients could benefit from.

This type of scripted approach has been used since 1900 and frozen to death. So what's news about it?

Antony Reed, an SJP partner by any chance?

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/antony-reed/17/bb5/784

with Anthony and John on this one

It's a good prospect finding script that plays the numbers game well. Any IFA out there who wants to add new clients could do well to copy it and pay someone to make the calls.

Disclosure: I am an IFA, and have no need of new clients: I've enough to do looking after the ones I already have.

Not a big fan of cold calling, but this hardly seems aggressive or overly intrusive....

What is all the fuss about, I can only presume its because its the holiday season and no other news to report, I am more likely to listen to this call than the numerous other calls I get daily trying to offer me a better internet/double glazing/mobile/phone connection.

Fair play in my opinion.

And your point is ? Seems a reasonable attempt to try and generate a meeting to offer services.

I expect Citywire (as fans of the new model adviser) wanted everyone to condemn SJP. Just goes to show that IFA's appreciate the guts, enterprise and skill SJP wealth managers show in building a client base and creating wealth.

As a man who winds up cold callers I would love to start telling this guy about the millions I have sitting in the bank and get his adviser all excited for a call and then cancel saying I lost it in a horse bet or something....

Anon 3, perhaps you should put together a counter script in the blogs/? I would be keen to use it

Seems reasonable enough. Dont use cold calling myself but if I did, this would seem like a sensible starting point

Strange that there was no mention of their posturing as providing Independent Advice-which somehow allows them to gain business from Lawyers.

David William said "Just goes to show that IFA's appreciate the guts, enterprise and skill SJP wealth managers show in building a client base and creating wealth."

Aye .. that'll be right!!

"Smooth talking"... tripe.

Why the big fuss about using a script.?

Would it surprise you to know that Robert De Niro does too? I haven't noticed any journos sneering at him.

Memories

My name is Jean MacIntyre from the Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada - etc - I well remember this from 1970. In my opinion, nothing wrong with it although it is rather dated. The guy is polite and up front as to what he wants.

I agree with Mandy.

Who saw fit to make this news? When I read the headline I thought I was going to be either infuriated at the underhandedness of it or amused/embarrased for the rest of my day at how slimy it was.

Neither hapened.

This really is a non-story and actually shows SJP in a very fair light.

Yawn, the standard Mark Weinberg issue, I used it at Abbey Life in the 80's. More effective if there's a nice fresh bait to put on the hook eg contracting out, critical illness. Their bait appears a little stale and mushy.

After all the debate over how we should become more professional in our approach, it just goes to show that despite being forced to sit more and more qualifications we still portay the image of cold calling salesmen

Scripts give direction - no matter what you are selling. The best people always practice - then they win more.

No statement of tied or independent adviser?

Dont see any harm in this not aggresive well put together

Citywire should get a grip. I dont belong to SJP but dont see what the fuss is about. You would be better advised telling 90% of the population that they wont be able to afford decent advice after 2012!

As a highly successful telemarketer with many years experience I have to say I don’t like it.

The concept of this sort of regimented script is so well worn that consequently it is no longer effective. SJP must be wasting a good deal of data by failing to close prospects for a meeting because of this script alone and are certainly churning more numbers (of calls) to get a meeting than they need to.

It comes across as cheap, tacky and cringe worthy IMO.

Just to put the record straight, SJP do not have a standard script - this is obviously one that has been put together by the practice or individual Partner concerned. The Partners are not employed by SJP and while there are certain regulatory standards to which they must adhere, to require every single Partner to use such a script would be unrealistic to say the least.

How can I say this for certain? As a former trainer at SJP I would have been asked to train such a script.

To report this find as being "the SJP telephone script," is inaccurate journalism.

Once again, Citywire, must do better.

Anon 3, I wish I had your time on my hands.

".....with a view to ensuring that you are aware of the risks you might be taking,...." l suggest the biggest risk is actually giving these people an appointment and l bet that isn't "fully explained"

Slow news day?

Harking back to the days of 'Mystery Shopper' calls, I understood that status disclosure had to be made very early in the call. There seems absolutely no mention of this in their script - but then SJP are rather adept at very deliberate and careful use of the english language, managing to 'infer' without 'stating'. Its all very classic 'paint a picture' stuff. I also seem to recall that there are rules about perporting to be 'carrying out a survey', or 'marketing' when in fact you are soliciting business. The only line that seems to be missing is 'if I could show you a way...'

Hello Jean,

So you'll remember the yellow "Smile as you dial" script?

Trust you're keeping well

Jon

I can't see what's wrong with the 'script' but it is intersting that some of the replies here are from SJP staff who appear to be defensive, why might that be.

There's nothing wrong with this scripted call to arrange an appointment. It's what the Partner then says at the subsequent meeting that you should try and scrutinise. High charges, lack of whole of market options, lowly qualified advisers, stereotypical financial advice packages and hugely exaggerated, selective and misleading performance history of the SJP funds and portfolios. They're pretty good at latching on to gullible, rich fools. Was it Mark Weinberg who said there was one born every minute? Leave these hucksters alone and focus on the business of fixing their financial wreakage; there's plenty out there.

...........and truly, what is the point of putting, "..... co founded by Lord Jacob Rothschild, Sir Mark Weinberg and Mark Wilson........" in any script unless it is there to confuse and or mislead. These people have made their money and run, and they've made it off the backs of sumilar past suckers who listened to such scripts. Hambro Life had something ("The Brian Parsons script") back in the early '70s. There was no proper disclosure then about what the TRUE objective of the meting was (commission), and this script hasn't really evolved much in 35 years

It reads like a script written to be read, not spoken. For example:

"Based in the City, we focus on ....."

I don't know anyone who talks like that.

Yep, slow news day, and further evidence of Citywire's decline into on-line gutter press. Used to be better when they didn't put out 15 mail bulletins a day, and actually spent some time on their stories (and doing the basics like editing and proof-reading).

As so many have said about this non-story - many if not most financial firms use telephone scripts, always have, always will. We all know client acquisition is a numbers game. Don't recall reading articles about the dreaded telephone scripts brainwashed into 30 trainees a month, 360 a year, for 12 years, by Edward Jones back in their day, and the forced call sessions of 25 calls in a sitting with trainers/supervisors listening in. Was that any better?

And as has been pointed out, this script was clearly put together by a particular SJP person in London, or someone making calls for them (note reference to "in the City" - did Citywire think all 1,500 SJP Partners operate in London?).

As above - Yawn.

so many gullible suckers one born every minute etc..... all wealthy

ah oui! that'll be right then

Anon 5, what a sickly little outburst. The true meaning of all business is to obtain a mutual profit. As advisers we are no different from any other business. A shopkeeper gets a mark up, we get a commission. The shopkeeper sells whatever, we do finances. Both do it with a smile but in the case of a commission we need to declare our mark up.

So yes, the true meaning behind an appointment is to make a profit but you would not make a profit if you can't help people and add value.

and now I'm really brassed off because I've read all your responses - doh! An IFA who just lost 5 minutes of his life that he'll never get back again... must improve on my time management skills.

Ooh Mr Holt, Anon 5 seems to have touched a raw nerve. Yes the true meaning of business IS to make a mutual profit. However, there has to be a balance, and the profit to SJP and partners is immediate and guaranteed. The investor can only HOPE for the best. That is not "mutual" profit

Sometimes this Industry forgets where it came from. Most people whom make sarky comments about a direct sales professional approach never really understood much about selling the sizzle, In fact most of them would bore the back end of you in any given sales sceanario. There is nothing wrong in presenting yourself in a fair and professional manner be it by phone or in person, as long as its fair play, and without excessive pressure.

Remeber in life, its not where you start, its where you end up, and many high quality IFAs as a result of selling themselves have ended up ok, me included.

Could someone tell me if SJP are Independent, Multi tied or Tied? The scipt doesn't seem to mention their status and I was a little confused?

WHAT THEY DO NOT COMMUNICATE IS THEIR ADVISORY STATUS, beyond that whats the problem??

@Nigel Strutt - they appear to be multi tied and a product manufacturer, they are of course Wealth Managers.

To me the Advisory status a big issue but you cannot knock SJPs marketing nous.

I do wonder if as an example someone like Towry Law did something similar would it be so newsworthy? Of course I am not alleging that they do or implying that they would.

I think this is pretty much the same script the Pru were trying to get it's advisers to use 20 years ago. News? I think not.

This looks like a decent attempt to provide a service. At the end of the day SJP have had good results and are on ther up and the sour IFA press just want to knock them back.

anitaki, disagree. In any transaction the profit to the retailer is immediate and guaranteed. The consumer always hopes that the outcome of the purchase is good. That is not always the case.

There is always therefore an assumption that because we deal in money there is something slightly underhand/ shylock going on. Not a bit of it.

Financial advisers provide a valuable service. You seem to be caught up in the fact that I could be a SJP adviser. I'm not - but I'm sure that these chaps do their best with what they have. As it goes when I have looked at their portfolios they have performed well with low charges. Some of their older contracts are a bit arcane in their contract charges but that could be said of many others.

smile as you dial

Yes Jon - I remember 'smile as you dial' and good advice it was too. All of this has reminded me that it doesnt matter how many qualifications you have, if you havent got people skills and are able to communicate then letters after your name showing how clever you are are a waste of time.

Perhaps we need reminding that financial advice actually needs selling sometimes.

I can't believe that such a non-story has generated so many responses. They must all be as disappointed as I was that I wasted 2 minutes of my lfe reading it and then adding to the dirge.

2 minutes.....wish I could speed read!!!

Very lazy journalism and who is 'Mark Wilson.'

No, Citywire has not lost the plot.

54 comments in one morning for basically cutting and pasting an SJP script is genius web journalism.

Citywire live on hits - the more hits, the more they can charge their advertisers. The publication should be applauded for its ingenuity, not damned.

It's good to know that the old appointment making skills remain intact and effective.

Time we ex Tied agents and Managers honed our skills again

David, l'm afraid you are missing the point. Nobody begrudges an honest mutual profit, but when that profit comes via pretending to be something else, then that is deception. EVERY SJP "client" that l have ever met, perhaps not as many as you, but every single one has believed that he had been given honest, INDEPENDANT, "whole of market" advice. As has been said by others before me, publication of this script IS newsworthy because the caller is STILL not disclosing status

Looks like the disclosure of status from SJP is that the caller is a 'marketing consultant.' To be honest, the independent tag does not all of a sudden make anyone a good adviser. You are possibly commenting legalistically on how one should disclose their status. The SJP offering is pretty good and when it comes to a pension has as big a multi offering as anyone else. Lots of good funds from many different investment houses.

I have often found that people who scorn honest marketing (smooth taking wide boys/ salesman, etc, etc) are the same that write off exams as a waste of time ('only good for people who are good at doing exams.') Truth is, it's always said by folk who can't do exams and lack the bravery to make their own approaches. Not a comment at you, anitaki, just a general observation.

I have no problem with SJP using a script I did when I was with the Prudential, Bancassurance and Towry Law. I remember my roots and excellent training that I have taken forward to my IFA role. I have a very good client base and love my job and used a similar approach when I started getting appointments to sell my service to fellow professionals such as Accountants and Solicitors. I say fellow professionals as I see my career just as important as the other two professions. The only problem I have is the misguided use of words where I have known SJP imply they are Independent (although this was meant to have stopped) and from a very good friend of mine who is EX SJP. Instead of some IFA's moaning all the time some should look at themselves and wonder why their retention is poor or their 1st to sale ratio is not impressive. There is a place in the market for all of us as long as we do it compliantly and ensure the clients needs come first. That means we can all build the trust back between the industry and consumer and a good successful business (as long as regulation dont destroy the industry first).

Thanks Anon 6 appreciate the info! Next question? Can a genuine Wealth manager not be IFA, unless ALL of the products and services they recommend are the very best for ALLof their clients? I mean nothing against SJP on these questions I am more interested in popular opinion to further my industry knowledge. I thought it was quite a good script and clever journalism Citywire to get us all reading it!!!!

I am also not connected at all with SJP and nor do I subscribe to the suggestion that other advisers should continue to pillory SJP just because they might have more of a restricted offering which has no doubt been professionally researched. When I worked for a previous national firm of Advisers we had a panel of providers and funds which themselves had been professionally researched.

Whilst advisers keep whingeing about this approach then it will be interesting to see all of the time that they currently spend researching the whole of the market and the evidence that they produce to demonstrate that they have done this.

And advisory firm, no matter how you want to portray them, that can make in excess of £180 million in profit when all others supported by AEGON and Standard Life continue to make losses must be doing something right. Clients are not fools, they have access to all of the information via the Internet and newspapers so you cannot build a business which become so profitable on the so-called back of expensive contracts.

Let's be clear here I am not at all associated with SJP but quite frankly and I do admire them!

in answer to nigel strutt's question, i believe that a doctor should be able to prescribe medication from 'the whole market' as should a financial adviser/wealth manager etc etc in respect of financial products, otherwise neither are able to truly prescribe/recommend the best available treatment/solution. if i had a medical need i wouldnt want to visit a doctor who could only prescribe glaxo pharmaceuticals (no offence to glaxo, i'm sure they are a world class company with a product for every known ailment).

Looks very professional to me - it beats several questionable and less well-polished approaches I have had from local and national IFA consultants - all of whom struggled to communicate with clarity what their proposition was. There is nothing new or questionable in this approach. Indeed it is significantly better than most individuals would use. To echo a previous comment whoever posted this just doesn't know or appreciate how SJP works. There is no "standard" approach - indeed that is why many experienced professionals join their proposition - i.e. to be treated like adults and evolve their own approach and business practice free from the shackles that most employed IFA businesses adopt.

I think an honest approach is always the best way. So here's my attempts at a script.

Please note that this is for the purposes of extracting a little humour from our industry and is not the actual script that our company condones. Nor has it been authorised by our compliance department.

Hello, my name is ................................ from ............................... a small local team of IFA's. We are regulated by the Financial Services Authority and after completing their research in Central London and Monte Carlo they have told me that you would be delighted to set up a meeting with me and pay me by the hour at a very handsome rate regardless of whether or not you found the appointent useful.

I would be delighted to come out to visit you at your convenience to discuss these matters further however I am currently in the process of filling in Form B to prove that I have done Form A, Form C to prove that I have done Form B, Form D to prove that I have done form C and so on, you get the picture.

The meeting will take approx 40 minutes and then if you stupidly agree to addressing your needs and requirements I will be pestering you with paperwork to sign for the next 37 years.

The manner in which we work will change approx every 4 weeks and you will be issued with a new client agreement whenever it does change. The new client agreement may look the same but if you look closely enough there will be at least one word that is different and sometimes there may even be as many as two.

It is very important that you read this document whenever it is given to you very carefully because if you dont you wont know how to complain when everything beyond my control makes your investment go t!ts up.

How does next Friday sound?

Wasn't going to add comment it has all been said. However I remember my first sales trainer telling me nothing happens until a sale is made. We can't all be paid for sitting in our ivory towers on a fat salary and bonuses telling others what to do, so best of luck SJP tele-sales

Excellent script and hats off to them. Similar to Hargreaves Lansdown, some people will only see the negative in successful tactics. They are professional and have respect in the industry

Mind you, their after service was awful. I tried to switch a pension from SJPand their hold times were dreadful - 38 minutes if I can recall

All this seems very straight forward to me, someone who works in the 'city' has employed a marketing consultant to call potential clients for him/her/business to try and secure a meeting.

You would hope that at that meeting the appropriate documents etc would be given including all disclosure regarding status etc.

I feel that it is time that we stopped the SJP witch hunt and concentrate on our own business...if they are that bad why do they recruit so many IFA's? Before this gets inundated with 'because they pay 9 times renewal' etc which is the normal nonsense put on here, maybe it is because they are quiet liked by their clients, peers in the industry and advisors who work with them - not for them?

Maybe a slow news day but look at the response level just because it mentioned SJP - quick pass me another rock to throw from my glass house...

It what was not said that is interesting.

WHY did they change their name from J Rothschild to SJP? Because the ‘real’ Rothschild (who were offering retail products at the time) had a complete fit that this downmarket lot were using the hallowed name. And of course the word Assurance in the old title was a dead giveaway.

Also interesting that they have to prospect and cold call. I know that some IFAs do, but many (myself included) don’t do this sort of thing at all and only take business from referrals from existing clients and professional connections – solicitors and accountants.

But as many have said this is really a bit of a non story – it is a very similar script as that used by Everest and Anglian double glazing. It only surprises me that anyone with any money could be so daft as to be taken in. I don’t say that as an IOFA but as a member of the public who does tell unsolicited sales calls to go forth and multiply.

For anyone who has purchased a lead - would be interested to find what script these marketing companies use?

Oh dear citywire....... with "news" like this I fear your offices must be cluttered with barrels from which your journalistic staff are busily scraping the bottom of !!

I dare not even comment on the article for fear of boring myself to sleep on my keyboard !!

Blimy! Takes me back to Dunbar days........I'm amazed people have to stoop to this and deprofessionalise the industry. Through careful branding and networking over many years our phone just keeps ringing. Surely if SJP had got this right they would just be answering calls (as we do) not making them!

My goodness how far up your own backsides can some of you people get ?

If you dont have a " script " then how will you know how you are doing with whatever you are trying to get across ?

I would think that if 90% of the people who get on these and other blogs were " professional " in their approach to their work and actually prepared themselves then the industry would be a much better place.

If you control what you are doing then you should make a better job of it and we would not now be submerged in compliance and regulation.

Perhaps even more important a more general " professional " approach might get adviser incomes into a more respectable bracket where they can be thought to be reasonably fit to " advise " others on their finances.

I think this is going from a witch hunt to *illy waving contest ....who can have the most clients without picking up the phone to call anyone? I am in the industry and we have to call people to make appointments. Not keen on the complete script approach but as a backup it is useful to have. So what if a partner from SJP uses a marketing company to make calls?? Grow up.

its funny - they make mention of Rothschild & Weinberg but dont mention Target Life or Applied Crowbar - wonder why that is?

Any ideas?

Why don't you tear the real idiots to pieces? FS effing A

Well done Citywire! The number of responses show that you scored a bull with this article!

@Nigel Strutt

I am with you on the definition of Wealth Manager being 'whole of market'. The term is the new parlance to describe advisors across all sectors and no doubt shall be replaced in the near future by another tag.

They are pretty good at putting a positive spin on things and like a lot of posters agree that they at least get off their backsides to make it happen.

I do not concur with their lack of disclosure as to how they define their advisory status and yes I have been to SJP client facing presentations as well as being approached by their Business Development guys.

Why bother with a focus on such an old school and frankly pointless script. The real issue here is the charges on SJP contracts in 2010 and the comparison to the IFA world. Do SJP's own clients and the FSA really know what SJP are charging? And o so often SJP clients believe they are independent......

I personally don't see a problem with people going out and working to build a business however I think that the script is full of closed end question and mis-leading as it talks about the past CEO who cut and ran. And why call all of the advisers working for them Partners, why do that if it is not to mis-lead. They are self employed that get more for selling SJP IP high income over the under lying fund IP High income even though the latter performs better because it does not have another layer of charges on it.

I have to say at this point that I did look at the option of working with SJP, they seem nice to work for, the guy that I saw was very nice, and I could of made the most money there. When I asked him about RDR and other questions from a client view point, the mood changed until he moved back to how much I could earn.

I don't know if anyone else is with me but I felt that I would be selling my soul.

Oh and have a happy Bank holiday ( one thing that we must be thankful to the Banks for)

There is nothing wrong with a script, it helps ensure the consistency and quality of any message or objective you are trying to achieve.

SJP's script may not to be everyone's taste, but in fairness to the company, if someone says 'no' there is a polite, non-pushy way to end the call or leave details for the client to contact them at a future date.

T

Not bad SJP- we used the same back in the late 70s when I was at Abbey Life- so nothing new here but good on you & good luck - as for the various comments like 'the man who likes winding up cold callers' et all- thanks for the insight into your psyche- maybe you started with doing some cold calling?

Seems to me there's a whole bunch of hypocrits out there. Even though you might not be "tied" or restricted, just how open are you to new products or providers? In my experience there are too many advisers set in their ways. So a little bit of pot/kettle to me.

Anyway is tied such a bad thing? If there is no disclosure then yes. However how many of you hypocrits disclose that you tend to use the same providers regardless?

To the genuine whole of market IFA's I apologise - the whole 12 of you!

I have no issue with the idea of a script per se, and I offer no comment on the SJP script, but am I alone in thinking that cold-calling financial services is prohibited?

Not much wrong with that. For a more entertaining script see an online chat conversation below. Any feedback welcomed.

We're connecting you to a member of the lovemoney.com team quite literally while you read these words - a member of the team will be with you in a moment!

You are now chatting with 'Paul'

Paul: Hello John, how can I help?

John: Hi Paul, I am looking for a life insurance quote

Paul: We can help with that. The best thing to do is for me to arrange a call for you with one of our advisors. It won't take long and free now.

Paul: Do you have a number we can call on?

John: I do but Id rather do it via chat. Which is why I cam on here.

Paul: The best thing to do is search online and if you have any questions we can answer those\do some further research for you - does that sound ok?

Paul: I'm happy to wait while you produce a quote

John: where should i search for a quote?

Paul: http://www.lovemoney.com/lifeinsurance/

John: ok will get one now

Paul: We also offer £100 cashback for new policies at the moment, so you're searching at the right time!

John: An error occured while we were trying to retrieve your quotation, this error is a temporary problem. We are sorry for any inconvienience caused.

Paul: Sorry - we seem to have a technical problem. I've just run a quote though and it worked. Might be worth trying again.

John: I'll try somewere else. or if you can help I need £250k 12year level term.Joint. DoB 11/11/65 male Non Smoker 04/07/1957 female non smoker.

Paul: I'll run a quote for you know. Is that ok?

John: yes

Paul: Just running now John

John: NP

Paul: We have £40.35 with Aviva. How does that sound?

Paul: Would you like me to email that through?

John: Does it cover accidential death?

Paul: do you mean while the policy is being underwritten? or do you mean when the policy has been set up?

John: When setup

Paul: yes it does

Paul: there are no restrictions on death

John: are there any exclsuions on it?

Paul: no exclusions

Paul: But it is subject to being underwritten

John: Health is perfect for the two of us. Will we need a GP report or a medicial. and it does cover sucide then?

Paul: It will all depend on the questions you answer on the application when it comes to the GP report. If yuo answer "YES" to some medical questions, it will usually ask for a report.

Paul: In terms of suicide...

Paul: I will need to just check for you.

Paul: Some Insurance companies will cover if you have ahd the policy for longer than 12 months.

Paul: It might be better for me to send over the full Key Features so you can have a read and it may answer all yuor questions

John: someone told me that they have limits based on age and amount of cover at which they will require a GP report or a medicial regardless of the answers to the questions. Is this not the case?

Paul: It differs with all lenders John

Paul: and every application

John: I am not wanting to borrow money!

Paul: True

Paul: But it might cost them!

Paul: If you are a little concerned, it may be better to speak to one of our experts?

Paul: would you like me to do this for you?

John: sorry Im on the phone. will get back to you in a few mins.

Paul: ok

John: still on phone Paul. can u email me that and ill have a quick look and let you know if I want to go ahead. mywifeandi69@hotmail.com

Paul: no problem will do now

Paul: whats your surname John

John: Rea

Paul: and your wifes first name?

John: Sarah

John: have u sent it?

Paul: Just sent John

John: great. give me a min or 2 to look over it.

Paul: Ok

John: Life insurance amount in the first month of year 1: £250,000 This reduces each month - Whats this all about?

Paul: John, it really would be best for one of our experts to give you a call. It really won't take long and no obligation. Do you have a number we can call on?

Paul: It's slightly out of my field you see

John: That is a decreasing term I am looking for a level term.

Paul: Apologies - sending through a level term quote now

John: np

Paul: Premium is £60.49

Paul: Just emailed through

John: np 2mins

John: Ok if we can make the term renewable and be within £10 either side of the price I will go with that. Just one thing though: Its says "£1,225.73 immediately then £1.51 a month from month 49 until your payments stop." but its says earlier in the doc that you do not offer advice whats that all about. Back in 2mins just nipping out for a smoke.

John: Sorry as payment to my fancial adviser

John: the £1225.73

Paul: I cannot offer you advice. I can arrange a call for you though. You do have a few queries so it's best to speak to someone John and we might be able to help on price if not online as well

John: I assume I am paying the £1225.73 through my premiums?

Paul: We discount very heavily

Paul: If you find a cheaper quote elsewhere we will match it

John: I assume I am paying the £1225.73 through my premiums?

John: how do u discount?

Paul: It really is best to speak over the phone

Paul: IM isn't appropriate for this conversation

Paul: It will be easier!

John: ok but am paying the £1225.73 through my premiums?

John: and if so is this the norm?

Paul: We can discount, but I can't authorise. Can I pass this conversation to the insurance manager as he may be able to help more than I can

John: Yes but cant you answer the question- "am paying the £1225.73 through my premiums?" 1st.

Please wait while I transfer the chat to 'Tim'.

You are now chatting with 'Tim'

Tim: Hi John

John: hi tim

Tim: Thanks for being patient

John: NP Paul wont ansewr my question above.

Tim: Paul is really here to only answer standard questions! And this may be slightly out of his field.

Tim: yes I can see your question

Tim: Basically..

Tim: we do an enormous amount of Life Insurance with each lender, we do all the leg work and as we put so much volume through they give us different levels of commission. Which we can then sacrifice to make sure you are getting a lower premium.

Tim: You will tend to find it will be even cheaper than going direct, as if you go direct they would then have the costs of doing all the work themselves

Tim: So, no you are not paying for it in your premiums. But we do get paid to do the work for them

Tim: Does that make sense?

John: Kinda, so if you scrafice commission I get a lower premium?

Tim: the quotes that have been provided already have a sacrifice on them

Tim: but yes, we do control that in house

John: and that makes my premium lower?

Tim: yes

John: so then I am paying the commission throught my premium?

Tim: no

Tim: its just that we can give up our payment to make it even cheaper

John: Ok. Was just concerned that you got should a whack of cash -"Paid to your Financial Advisor" as per the quote doc. But you don't actually advise and that I was paying for the advice that I never got.

John: Anyway lets go ahead and set this up.

Tim: We also have an advice route ( which in the finance world you would pay more per month as it is an advised sale ) but we again, sacrifice and give the same premium whether you want advice or not! ( I feel like I am bragging ) But its true.

Tim: Ok, let me just take some more details from you. Bear with me a few seconds

Tim: John have you processed a quote for yourself on the system yet or did you receive some errors?

John: I got a quote.

Tim: was it what Paul send over?

John: yeah

Tim: ok , you have two options.

Tim: 1. Go back onto the system and fill in the online application

Tim: 2. We will need to make contact over the telephone to set all this up

Tim: which do you prefer?

Tim:

John: I think I'll get you to do it over the phone.

Tim: sure, whats your number I will give you a call shortly?

John: Can you call my wife and she will do it. Its just I have throat cancer and dont like talking on the phone and I am hard to make out.

Tim: of course, no problems. What is Sarah's number?