Endowment Policies SUCK like AXA
My policy was started in 1974 when I took out my first mortgage. Great things were promised in 1983 when this policy was converted to a 'with profits' and another one opened to run alongside it. These, we were told would yield around £40,000 i.e enough to pay off the £25,000 mortgage and provide around £15000 for all those things we might dream about but can't afford when bringing up a family!
These policies were actually taken out through Equity and Law, reputed to be one of the best performing companies in this area. Sadly, in recent years Sun Life took over Equity and Law and then AXA bought them out.
Now, I know everyone has lost faith in this type of policy but the one thing which kept me involved was that the 'terminal bonus' would boost the final amount by upwards of 20%. I was therefore expecting a payout of maybe £28,000 on my two policies. AXA says, and I quote 'our aim is to use the terminal bonus to ensure that you get a fair return, which reflects, among other things, our investment experience on the assets backing your policy while it has been with profits'.
In the year my policy matured AXA decided to reduce the terminal bonus to 5% diddling me out of at least £3500!! This despite the recovery in the stock market with the FTSE up to almost 6000 at the time they reduced the terminal bonus to 5%!!
So, they take you all ways, and of course there is no comeback, despite my letters of protest!
On receipt of my pathetic payout, £17,000 less than the figure promised in 1983 I decided to break all ties with AXA as I also had a Bond with them. This was following a piece on the BBC's excellent 'Working Lunch' programme, which concluded that many bonds were treated as 'ZOMBIE funds' by companies like AXA. They held them but were doing nothing much with them. (When we started this bond we were told that our money should double around every 7 years. Well in the first 7 years £4000 became almost £8000. In the last 6 years with AXA £8000 has become £10200! Get my point.)
AXA, in common with many of these similar companies ,SUCKS. Be very careful where you put your money. Check who is advising you. They are often only interested in what fees they can get.
In 2000 my IFA told me not to put my money into property. I put £3000 into a European MAXI ISA, on his advice. This amount is still only worth about £1600 after 6 years, falling to £900 at one point! Fortunately I ignored his advice about property, and bought a second house, which has not only grossed me £31000 in rent but has gone up by around 150% in value in 6 years!!
Follow your own instincts! AXA will not get any more of my money! Will it get any of yours?
FSA/PN/111/2004 21/12/2004
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) today fined AXA Sun Life plc 500,000 for producing misleading advertisements for the sale of two products. The advertisements were part of a far-reaching media campaign which included direct-offer promotions, advertising in a variety of national magazines and newspapers and television advertisements. They were distributed over a considerable period of time, February 2002 to January 2004, thereby putting a significant number of consumers at risk of being misled.
From Grumbletext
Axa Sun Life
latest - Axa trustees reduced fund to ruins Fundsmutual.com targets insurance
giant Canadian Colin Alexander of Ottawa has posted the website http://fundsmutual.com/
Fundsmutual.com. It targets Axa, the worldwide French insurance company and parent
of the world's third largest mutual fund company, Alliance Capital. Mr. Alexander
says that Axa Royal Exchange totally destroyed his family trust. But when..
Welcome to Axa in Blunderland!
Asset Mismanagement, Wealth Destruction, Mistrusts,
Laughingstocks
"Is it right? Is it fair?
You tell me. I have no head for ethics."
Reproduced from
Barron’s
Are you a complainer? Do you believe we are entitled to good service? Do you think
complaining is a good way to get it? North One Television a major independent T.V.
company would like to hear from you. The Development Producer is looking for people
who stand up for their rights and are proud to cause a fuss.
Click Here.
These sites were created because Solicitors Ingram Winter Green and Denniss Matthews will not respond to my many letters, and because The Law Society will not investigate all this:-
The reason these sites are still here presumably, is because they are ALL not willing to answer the simple question . . “Did you or did you not conspire with your clients, S J Patel, Nathan & Ruth Teitelbaum of Fineland Properties Ltd, to deliberately LIE, CHEAT and DECEIVE in order to DEFRAUD me of my considerable claims against them?” . . well not in Court anyway. . . lying is one thing . . perjury another. All the content of these sites is based on that premise, and NONE of it has ever been denied or even contested.
For the removal of doubt, I have never called Daniel J Ginsbury “a lying, conniving, scheming piece of pig shit, low life life gutter scum”.
I merely ask the question? If all of the above is true would that make him one? Daniel Ginsbury declines to ans either the former or the latter. It is true that I accuse IWG of being a bunch of total Wankers for allowing these sites to be here and are not able to fathom a way out of this dilemma. Not worthy to call themselves Solicitors in fact.
DISCLAIMER . . Click here
My claims made on this and other web sites are based on the fact that Metcalfe Copeman
& Pettefar ( MCP Law ) refuse to answer even the most basic of questions. They should
have no reason, unless to do so would embarrass them or their clients in disclosure
of lies, connivance, and conspiracy. In exactly the same fashion as the IWG, Denniss
Matthews conspiracy. I have asked them over and over again to tell the truth but
they have declined. It is reasonable and correct therefore to make the assumptions
that I have and that are printed through out these sites. MCP Law still have the
opportunity to refute these claims if they wish . . . Provided they can prove it
that is.
In fact the reason they didn’t refute them . . . is they were true. Lisa Richardson
DID Conspire to Defraud.
Their clients DID NOT buy the property at AUCTION and they
DID know about the dispute when they AGREED to buy the property. In fact they bought
the property BECAUSE of the dispute. . . . All this has been sworn to under OATH
by Jonathan Burton Solicitor at MCP. . . . But he calls it . . . . “Was not meant
to deceive.”
