Twitter icon Email alerts icon Latest News RSS icon Magazine icon Stay connected:

View the article online at

Why we quit Brewin for Charles Stanley: Leicester Six reveal warts and all

by James Phillipps on Apr 03, 2014 at 14:52

They said that at one meeting with head of investment management Stephen Ford and regional director Robin Beer at their Leicester office, it was ‘indicated that ‘they felt the pain’ of the Leicester divisional directors.

However, Sawyer, Cufflin and Hopewell all had subsequent meetings with different board members, but said none of their grievances were addressed.

‘The hunt for a new home’

Cufflin admits he was in on/off talks with Charles Stanley from 2010 which became more serious in 2012/2013. In early 2012 Cufflin also had ‘advanced discussions’ with both Smith & Williamson and Barclays Wealth.

Coulson and Hailes were approached by headhunters for Quilters in late 2011 with Coulson actually meeting the company’s head office.

Meanwhile Sawyer said he turned down an ‘alternative role’ around October 2012 because he ‘wrongly believed’ he was to be promoted.

By March 2013 all six were in advanced discussions with Charles Stanley and in the end were placed on gardening leave on 26th of the month after accepting new roles. They said only Sawyer received a counter-offer from Brewin, which he rejected.  

Brewin said

Ford said: ‘We will always act to protect our business where our clients’ interests have been threatened and where we have been advised that contractual obligations have been broken. We are not able to make any further comment while the matter is subject to court proceedings.’

If you have a comment on this story please email

Sign in / register to view full article on one page

3 comments so far. Why not have your say?

Philip Milton

Apr 03, 2014 at 18:16

It always bemuses me.... whether or not such contracts are legally binding..... but conversely, why sign a contract in the first place if you're not intending to honour its terms at the end, whatever happens? Or, what sort of integrity is involved if you believe it is acceptable to go against such contract when relationships change?

If there is a gardening leave period or a no-contact or no direct solicitation clause, then shouldn't it be adhered to regardless of your personal financial circumstances.... or even one could say the legality proven or otherwise.... don't sign in the first place if you don't like it.... and is any new firm likely to receive the same treatment or mete out the same behaviour if the 'same thing' happens in the future...?

What do others think? Is it simply a case of Brewins yesterday, Charles Stanley today and someone else tomorrow?

report this

Mr X

Apr 03, 2014 at 18:18

This is riveting!

report this

David Cowell

Apr 03, 2014 at 21:06

The answer to Philip's question is don't work for a large firm; keep it small and personal or take the consequences. Perhaps these people haven't the confidence to go it alone?

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Sponsored Video: Bringing it all back home

As the UK coalition government strives to rebalance the national economy, so called 'reshoring' looks set to play an increasingly important role in economic recovery.

Today's top headlines

Sponsored Video: Barings on investing in Frontier Markets

From Nigeria to Pakistan and from Kenya to Kuwait, frontier markets are catching investors' attention as never before.

More about this:

Look up the shares

  • Brewin Dolphin Holdings PLC (BRW.L)
    Register or Sign in to receive email alerts for items in your favourites whenever we write about them
  • Charles Stanley Group PLC (CAY.L)
    Register or Sign in to receive email alerts for items in your favourites whenever we write about them

More from us


On the road

Click here to find out more from the Audience Development team.

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet