24 Comments

  1. David Brooks
    July 9, 2018 @ 7:26 pm

    Oh Angela here you go again the staff you have highlighted are all qualified. You are very deliberate in your methods to discredit. So much so in fact it headlines that you are indeed in DeVeres pockets. As you are aware the advisors have merely not paid there annual subscription to the register. We have a great team of experienced qualified professionals and we don’t appreciate your veiled efforts to discredit us.

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 9, 2018 @ 9:13 pm

      What company are you with David?

      Reply

  2. Member
    July 9, 2018 @ 10:20 pm

    Interesting, an admission that lots of the staff make claims of membership without actually being paid up members. Does that mean that they do not have to adhere to this?

    https://www.cisi.org/cisiweb2/docs/default-source/cisi-website/ethics/code-of-conduct-16.pdf?sfvrsn=2

    Has this institute been alerted to this?

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 10, 2018 @ 7:45 am

      You are right – lots of so-called advisers either make up titles, or claim to have qualifications they do not have. Most do not adhere to the required principles and, yes, you are right the CISI – as well as the CII – should indeed be alterted to this as it is totally unacceptable.

      Reply

  3. Action Jackson
    July 10, 2018 @ 2:00 pm

    Got your facts wrong again, sorry WONG again.

    Reply

  4. David Brooks
    July 10, 2018 @ 6:59 pm

    Angela why is it you haven’t rebuffed the alledged connection you have with Nigel Green and DeVere? Don’t you think your followers are owed an explanation as to why the DeVere group despite being the biggest crooks on the planet have never been highlighted on your website? They have being fined and thrown out of countless juristictions and damaged people but you remain silent and are just a tool to gain growth for DeVere by targeting his competition. I look forward to you explaining yourself and perhaps Pensiondave can be highlighted soon. More to come……..

    Reply

  5. Action Jackson
    July 11, 2018 @ 6:58 am

    You have a valid point – I have asked the same question – my comments just get deleted and my IP is banned !
    Apart from the trashing – Angela Brooks (Wong) is not what she reports to be

    Reply

  6. Action Jackson
    July 11, 2018 @ 2:30 pm

    You do realise that these databases only display names of paying members and this does not have a bearing on their qualification.
    I have 3 CII qualifications but do not pay their Admin fee, consequently I do not appear on their search.

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 11, 2018 @ 2:33 pm

      Yes I do realise that. However, how can the public – i.e. potential clients – check out an adviser’s qualifications? And why don’t you pay the CII fee? Surely, having gone to the trouble to study for the exam you’d want your clients to be able to verify your qualification?

      Reply

      • Action Jackson
        July 12, 2018 @ 11:12 am

        I have and can show anyone, including a prospective client my qualifications, I have the certificates and copies of licencing etc with me at all times, I can confirm that in approaching 25 years I can count on one hand where questions have been asked – they tend to be about the product NOT the adviser/brokerage.
        If your prospective client is asking these questions you should re visit how you approach and communicate with prospects.

        Reply

    • CII member
      July 12, 2018 @ 7:09 am

      As a member of the CII, I am appalled by all of this.

      It is a membership fee, not an “admin” fee, for a professional body. Qualified members, by being paid members, sign up to a code of conduct. Some are claiming to be members and some are using CII designations after their names without being members. This is expressly not allowed by the CII. I cannot comment about the CISI, though I am sure they will have similar rules.

      The CII need to take firm action here to maintain the integrity of the Institute for those that are genuine, qualified members.

      ps

      Three CII exams does not make anyone qualified to any level close to being an acceptable standard.

      Reply

      • Action Jackson
        July 12, 2018 @ 11:26 am

        Dear CII Member
        I can assure you I am fully qualified, to an acceptable , as part of my personal development and learning I have take a CII or similar exam each year.
        I do not consider the CII to be any more than a trade body, consequently do not feel compelled to pay to appear.
        The CII do little to support their members, are not active, however, they do have a legal team that will sue if you use their tags and don’t pay their fee – I can comment about the CISI, they do have similar rules but very importantly deliver a service and support their members.

        Reply

        • CII member
          July 12, 2018 @ 12:53 pm

          Given that you have 3 papers, that is evidence in itself you are not ”fully qualified”. I have not been aware of anyone using that term since the mid-nineties when there were only 3 very basic level exams.

          The Chartered Insurance Institute is a trade body? Are you aware of how institutes achieve Chartered status?

          You are not compelled to pay, no one is. For me the issue is simply those that use a designation that they have either not earned by examination or those that pass off that they are members, to give the public the impression of somehow being associated with the professional institute, are misleading the public.

          I think the support may vary upon location and many choose differing institutes for a number of reasons.

          Your comment that the CII will sue pretty much justifies this blog, the seriousness with which the CII takes all of this is self-evident from your comment.

          Reply

  7. Jo Kerr
    July 11, 2018 @ 2:35 pm

    You do realise that these databases only carry the names of subscription paying members.
    I have 3 CII qualifications but do not pay their ‘admin’ fee so do not appear on the search.
    Therefore, your comments are irrelevant!

    Reply

  8. David Brooks
    July 11, 2018 @ 6:26 pm

    Thanks Action Jackson but can we get some clarity around the issue raised about Pension-life s total lack of illumination on De-Vere and the accusation of alledged collusion between Angela and Nigel to rubbish the competition.
    If for nothing but your followers please respond

    Reply

    • Action Jackson
      July 12, 2018 @ 12:22 pm

      Had heard similar rumblings, does seem strange that Angela does not mention the biggest firm in the overseas industry – especially given the history,

      Reply

      • Angie
        July 12, 2018 @ 1:19 pm

        As I keep saying, don’t think about what I do write – think about what I don’t write. There is a reason for both.

        Reply

  9. David Brooks
    July 12, 2018 @ 10:34 pm

    My word your cryptic answer leaves the readers with doubts. It’s as if you are in fear of even the mention of DeVere.
    So now I’m thinking there are two options
    Opinion 1 You are in collusion with DeVere as is thought across the industry OR
    Opinion 2 Nigel has had his greaseball lawyer ‘s on to you
    Either way Angela you are not looking so good from this thread and I would implore you to tell us why it is you shyaway from the many people who have told you of their despair at the hands of Mr Slippery aka Golm aka Nigel Green
    Your followers deserve an answer or not? it’s up to you at the end of the day but our cryptic nonsense dosent wash

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 12, 2018 @ 10:53 pm

      I agree entirely – your cryptic nonsense doesn’t wash. Tell you what, you tell me exactly who you are and who you work for and I will give you a full answer. Publicly. And I will also recommend a decent English teacher.

      Reply

  10. David Brooks
    July 12, 2018 @ 11:47 pm

    Your good I give you that! As good as any spindoctor employed by Nigel. Answer the question posed to you what is going on with you and De Vere ?

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 13, 2018 @ 7:59 am

      There’s nothing clever about asking who you are. You know who I am – why won’t you disclose who you are? I have nothing to hide – what do you have to hide?

      Reply

  11. Sandra
    July 13, 2018 @ 7:50 am

    Good Morning from Vancouver
    I turn to Pension-life on a regular basis to catch up on what’s happening in the industry, I won’t be anymore, Angela it’s clear from the comments you have something to hide and too be honest your looking like a FRAUD.There are other review and comparison sites out there that haven’t being compromised

    Regards

    Past follower

    Reply

    • Angie
      July 13, 2018 @ 8:03 am

      This isn’t a review and comparison site – it is a blog. I get quite a few negative comments about me and Pension Life – and guess who approves them? Me. If I had something to hide and was a fraud would I approve comments that openly criticise me and accuse me of being dodgy? There is only one person that I have ever blocked, and that was someone who was clearly sick. I have absolutely nothing to hide and am an open book.

      Reply

  12. David Brooks
    July 13, 2018 @ 11:33 am

    Angela your losing credibility and your followers trust, believe it or not I don’t want that to happen. You need to clear up this DeVere question. Have you seen http://www.complaintsboard.com absolutely disgusting what they have done to people. Does Nigel have some hold over you? has he threatened you legally that you can’t even write the name DeVere if so respond with a simple yes and I will stop poking the dog.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *