https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pension-fraud-stolen-uk-expat-brite-advisory-mark-donnelly-jjh5cr7mk

 

Interesting article and a reminder to us all about the risks of using offshore investment advisors 

and background to the case mentioned in todays ST     https://www.aol.com/sec-fines-york-firm-devere-8-million-over-192142813--sector.html

Beware shady farang

I used two different English/expat pension advisors .... both chose investments based on their commission and both lost me money, as well some investments still frozen due to scheme suspension.

 

Now only invest in property in home country as it's so hard to find a trustworthy advisor.

Edited April 28, 20242 yr by Kinnock

14 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

I used two different English/expat pension advisors .... both chose investments based on their commission and both lost me money, as well some investments still frozen due to scheme suspension.

 

Now only invest in property in home country as it's so hard to find a trustworthy advisor.

In years past while working O&G sector I was in contact with a somewhat shady " UK conultant" based in Bkk. He wanted a 2% fee to manage my investments. I found out later the co. he was representing was bogus and the BIB were tracking them down all the way to Singapore. I dodged that bullet. 

One of the products was a high interest bond from Australia that got exposed as well.

I wouldn't hire a foreigner in Thailand for anything.

This has been common place here for at least 20 years, particularly Brit so called independent IFA's who claim to sell regulated products. The products may be regulated but not him advising and selling outside of the UK!

1 minute ago, Mike Lister said:

This has been common place here for at least 20 years, particularly Brit so called independent IFA's who claim to sell regulated products. The products may be regulated but him advising and selling outside of the UK!

They obviously share contacts because I received cold calls for years afterwards.

18 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

I wouldn't hire a foreigner in Thailand for anything.

 

I was told once that if I was going to get cheated/screwed, et al in Pattaya the chances are better that it would be a "farang" rather than a local.

Just now, jaideedave said:

They obviously share contacts because I received cold calls for years afterwards.

It used to be that nana and soi Cowboy were swarming with them, even in the farang areas of Chiang Mai they were plentiful. Many of them today have taken on an air of respectability and have Thai partners and accommodation addresses in Bangkok but the game is still the same.

There are some advisors who do this since many years, and they know a lot about investments, risks, etc.

Some even have qualifications from respectable organizations.

But all of them make their money from commissions. And it is crazy how much commission is paid for some products.

Sometimes the commissions for the agents are way higher than the (expected) profit for the clients.

I guess one needs a strong character to not get influenced by high commissions.

I don't think the mutual fund industry is "regulated" in home country either.

 

As it's all basically gambling and the fund manager takes 2% and most funds don't do well. 

 

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I don't think the mutual fund industry is "regulated" in home country either.

 

As it's all basically gambling and the fund manager takes 2% and most funds don't do well. 

 

 

 

 

The mutual funds I buy in Canada and the US are highly regulated. And all of them pay management 0.5% or less. The largest fund I own charges 0.05% yearly fees. Averaging over 10% return for over 40 years, not including dividends. I can live with that.

 

I can't see why anyone would use one of those investment advisors. Rip off c*nts.

Many years ago I attended a two week training session in Dubai with a financial advisory firm. One of the guys who presented is the head of one of the advisory firms mentioned in the article, although he is not named. I realised very quickly that it was all about selling financial "investment" products to expats ... with the emphasis on "selling" the product that generated the highest up front commissions and annual fees. They couldn't give a toss about whether the product was good for the client or not. I decided to make a quick exit ... I wouldn't do that to anyone, even people I don't like very much. 

 

My advice to anyone who gets approached (in a cafe or by a phone call) by anyone describing themselves as a financial advisor is to run a mile from them, and never agree to meet them. 

The term "investement advisor" is still a unclassified profession. Everybody including his uncle can call himself an "investement advisor".

6 minutes ago, swissie said:

The term "investement advisor" is still a unclassified profession. Everybody including his uncle can call himself an "investement advisor".

 

Not in the UK they can't. And not for the past +40 years.

You need to have FCA controlled function 30 authorisation.

 

Even has a wiki page...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCA_Controlled_Functions

 

 

 

1 hour ago, gargamon said:

The mutual funds I buy in Canada and the US are highly regulated. And all of them pay management 0.5% or less. The largest fund I own charges 0.05% yearly fees. Averaging over 10% return for over 40 years, not including dividends. I can live with that.

 

I can't see why anyone would use one of those investment advisors. Rip off c*nts.

 

Depends how you define regulated.

 

It's the only profession in the world where they are not obligated to provide anything and still get paid. If your fund gets 0 per cent one year, they still get paid.

 

And you are claiming that you made 10 per cent during Covid when most businesses were shut down? So you made the same during Covid as you did in all other normal years?

 

I don't believe people who claim they make 10 per cent per year year after year in mutual funds without nary a glitch. 

 

It's the fund managers getting rich, not the investors. 

 

8 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

And you are claiming that you made 10 per cent during Covid when most businesses were shut down? So you made the same during Covid as you did in all other normal years?

 

I don't believe people who claim they make 10 per cent per year year after year in mutual funds without nary a glitch. 

My post said I averaged over 10% a year for over 40 years. Some years up 30%, other years down 30%. But the 40+ year average is over 10%.

 

You clearly shouldn't be investing or commenting on investing if you don't know what average means.

Edited April 28, 20242 yr by gargamon

10 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Depends how you define regulated.

 

It's the only profession in the world where they are not obligated to provide anything and still get paid. If your fund gets 0 per cent one year, they still get paid.

 

And you are claiming that you made 10 per cent during Covid when most businesses were shut down? So you made the same during Covid as you did in all other normal years?

 

I don't believe people who claim they make 10 per cent per year year after year in mutual funds without nary a glitch. 

 

It's the fund managers getting rich, not the investors. 

 

 

When you have no knowledge but go for it anyway 555

34 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

It's the fund managers getting rich, not the investors. 

 

 

Fund managers come and go but its time that makes investors rich.

I've seen 800% gain in 30 years from a clients mutual fund.

I'll still be under 80 in 30 years 😉

 

 

Edited April 28, 20242 yr by noobexpat

45 minutes ago, gargamon said:

My post said I averaged over 10% a year for over 40 years.

10% is the magic number that keeps coming up over and over and over.

 

Everyone who tries to convince others to invest in mutual funds always uses 10% as a selling point every single time.

 

So does that mean that most mutual fund managers are actually averaging 10%?

Or does it mean that all investors have been brainwashed with the same sales pitch?

 

I've looked at some portfolios where the numbers were 30% one year and 0% the next.

How can the same fund manager who got 30% one year be so incompetent and get 0% the next year?

 

You might argue the markets had a bad year. And I will argue that if someone is proficient in investing and able to get 30% one year, then they should be smart enough to avoid the markets altogether during a downturn instead of giving you 0% for the year.

 

It makes no sense. 

 

12 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

This has been common place here for at least 20 years, particularly Brit so called independent IFA's who claim to sell regulated products. The products may be regulated but him advising and selling outside of the UK!

Even the rep from a big insurer here sounded like a minor character in a gangster film.

Heavy cockney accent ”chasing up” documents. Very untrustwothy fired them!

45 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

10% is the magic number that keeps coming up over and over and over.

 

Everyone who tries to convince others to invest in mutual funds always uses 10% as a selling point every single time.

 

So does that mean that most mutual fund managers are actually averaging 10%?

Or does it mean that all investors have been brainwashed with the same sales pitch?

 

I've looked at some portfolios where the numbers were 30% one year and 0% the next.

How can the same fund manager who got 30% one year be so incompetent and get 0% the next year?

 

You might argue the markets had a bad year. And I will argue that if someone is proficient in investing and able to get 30% one year, then they should be smart enough to avoid the markets altogether during a downturn instead of giving you 0% for the year.

 

It makes no sense. 

 

What a load of nonsense you spout. The smart people who own mutual funds are buy and hold. The people that treat them as investments that are bought and sold often are just the fools the investment advisors are looking for.

 

Here's a fund I've been in for a long time. The expense ratio is 0.04%.

 

8 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

Even the rep from a big insurer here sounded like a minor character in a gangster film.

Heavy cockney accent ”chasing up” documents. Very untrustwothy fired them!

 

Wasn't the guy I complained about in this thread then ???

 

Seem to be the same character who's called a lot of people... 

 

  

 

 

57 minutes ago, gargamon said:

What a load of nonsense you spout. The smart people who own mutual funds are buy and hold. The people that treat them as investments that are bought and sold often are just the fools the investment advisors are looking for.

 

Here's a fund I've been in for a long time. The expense ratio is 0.04%.

 

 

I have been in VTI for a long time. Maybe I should shift into VFIAX?

13 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

 

I have been in VTI for a long time. Maybe I should shift into VFIAX?

Performance looks similar. I wouldn't be concerned with the “since inception“ low number as it looks like it was started at the top of the dot-com bubble. Also be aware that, if the instrument is not in a retirement fund, switching would be a taxable event. The only taxes I have paid in the 40+ years in vfiax is on the dividends. As it's mostly all profit at this point, it will be taxed when I sell. That's something most don't consider when trading/investing. All the money they've paid in taxes, in my case, has continued to benefit me, not the government.

Edited April 28, 20242 yr by gargamon

26 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Performance looks similar. I wouldn't be concerned with the “since inception“ low number as it looks like it was started at the top of the dot-com bubble. Also be aware that, if the instrument is not in a retirement fund, switching would be a taxable event. The only taxes I have paid in the 40+ years in vfiax is on the dividends. As it's mostly all profit at this point, it will be taxed when I sell. That's something most don't consider when trading/investing. All the money they've paid in taxes, in my case, has continued to benefit me, not the government.

Only pay taxes when I start taking distributions 

Dividends are reinvested

It is a holding in a 401k account what is basically on autopilot.

I am a buy and hold never pay much attention to it.

I could rebalance my holdings and future contributions as sometimes worry I could be doing better

but that is where problems start for most people There is alot of research to show that passive investors do better over long time periods compared to actively managed portfolios and risky trade behavior

I am so jealous of you USA, UK, Australia expats

 

get 5% from the bank

 

TH and home country MAX 2.3% gross

 

I would be so happy with 5%

 

guess impossible to register just an address for that purpose...

 

lol

11 hours ago, noobexpat said:

 

Not in the UK they can't. And not for the past +40 years.

You need to have FCA controlled function 30 authorisation.

 

Even has a wiki page...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCA_Controlled_Functions

 

 

 

 

Same in Thailand:  https://www.sec.or.th/EN  Need to be licensed by Thai SEC

23 hours ago, wordchild said:

and background to the case mentioned in todays ST     https://www.aol.com/sec-fines-york-firm-devere-8-million-over-192142813--sector.html

 

https://international-adviser.com/criminal-complaint-filed-against-devere-partners-in-thailand/