|
|
||||||
|
Did you buy an endowment using the 'Best Buy' recommendations of the Consumers' Association? Although they would argue that they didn't provide 'advice' it is a fact that many people have acted upon the 'recommendations' made in various surveys that were published over many years. According to the Financial Services Authority The Consumers' Association (Which? Magazine) IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR ANY EFFECT (GOOD OR BAD) THAT IT MAY HAVE HAD ON YOUR FINANCIAL WELL-BEING. NEVERTHELESS IF YOU ACTED ON THE CA'S MORTGAGE ENDOWMENT 'BEST BUYS' THEN YOU MAY FEEL SUFFICIENTLY AGGRIEVED TO REGISTER YOUR PROTEST WITH THE CA BY SENDING THEM AN EMAIL OR CREATE A LETTER OF COMPLAINT BY CLICKING ON THE LINK BELOW.... |
||||||
Thinking Of Bending The Truth In Order To Obtain Some 'Compensation'? Go Here First
|
||||||
|
This site will host all the relevant pages from Which? magazine going back to 1977 advocating Endowment Mortgages and recommending companies like Equitable Life! If anyone has good copies of these documents in .pdf or similar format please forward them by email HERE Following receipt of a letter from the legal department of Which? I am prohibited from supplying copies of the reams of back issues I have collected. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| If you would like to see the articles mentioned on this website please go to your local library or mail me HERE | ||||||
| Month | Year | Article Subject | ||||
| December | 1977 | "Mortgages" | ||||
| April | 1983 | "Insurance Policies" | ||||
| February | 1984 | "Insurance Advisers" | ||||
| March | 1984 | "Unit Linked Savings Plans" | ||||
| April | 1984 | "Mortgages" | ||||
| October | 1984 | "Investment Linked Life Assurance" | ||||
| January | 1985 | "Investment Update" | ||||
| October | 1985 | "Insurance" | ||||
| January | 1986 | "Where to Put Your Savings" | ||||
| May | 1986 | "Mortgages" | ||||
| January | 1988 | "Investing Your Money" | ||||
| June | 1990 | "Mortgages - The right one for You" | ||||
| August | 1998 | "The End of Endowments" | ||||
"CHOOSE YOUR PENSION" Published 1989 |
||||||
"An Independent Guide To Choosing The Best Pension For You" |
||||||
SERPS "Act Now Extra" " Must Act By 5 April 1989" |
||||||
Why this website?
I was an IFA between 1985 and 2002 and during the early part of this period I subscribed to the 'not-for-free' Which? magazine because it was helpful in assisting me with research into financial products as well as household goods and services. The Consumers' Association are supported by the profits generated by their publications and services yet they have the cheek to describe this site at 'Unhelpful', in what way? I am only pointing out that if you want to advise consumers you must face the consequences when the products you 'Recommended' as 'Best Buys' decades ago are deemed to be unsuitable by your own staff on websites and in press releases. If the CA want to influence the financial decisions of ordinary people they should apply to the Financial Services Authority and become authorised to do so, the same applies to any publication that purports to 'Inform' consumers. I have a scrap book FULL of articles promoting various investments that have been found lacking in efficacy many years later, these articles are taken from every newspaper in the land, they encouraged people to invest in 'Split Caps', 'Precipice Bonds', endowments and technology stocks. The newspapers can turn round and say they were not advising people but it is a sad fact that many consumers actually BELIEVE what the read in their favourite daily rag, the press are still influencing the financial decisions of millions of consumers with absolute impunity, they are totally unregulated and incredibly powerful, when are the authorities going to regulate the 'advice' they provide??
The Consumers' Association have actually PREVENTED many consumers from obtaining REDRESS, yes it is REDRESS and not COMPENSATION that consumers receive. The 'Letter Generator' and the endowmentaction website are confusing consumers, they produce letters that are defamatory and easy to defend because they imply that the advice was faulty in many ways whereas the advisers will have evidence on file to prove that more than one accusation is false and this brings the accuracy of whole complaint into question.