5 Comments

  1. DERRICK TOWLSON
    January 8, 2018 @ 9:30 am

    Feeling sick from the pit of my stomach after reading this. How dare they carry on doing this to decent hard working people, who the hell allows them to do this, they claim to have won many awards, who gives these and for what reasons. It,s all a closed club, they are daylight robbers without masks.
    I am just one of far too many clients that have been scammed then ripped off for hugely out of proportion fees, screwed if you exit etc. Beware, we have all worked hard for many many years with a plan of retirement and that has all changed with the click of a pen and these Oxygen Bandits are laughing in our faces. I would have rather given all my pension to a homeless person or hospice, at least I could have slept at night knowing it had done some good rather than lining the pockets of these s******s. I could go on but am too angry inside and stressed to write any more. BEWARE – AVOID AT ALL COSTS.
    Thankyou C-W-M AND O-M-I for screwing us all, may God give you early graves and turn you away at the Pearly gates.

    Dirka

    Reply

  2. John Rogers
    January 8, 2018 @ 7:39 pm

    It is a disgrace that the so called “financial industry” and the so called “justice system” allows such organisations as OMI to continue to exist. Are fraud and corruption at epidemic levels throughout the financial organisations and their government puppets to such an extent that every honest citizen is seen merely as a future victim? The parasites of CWM and OMI have impoverished many. They must not be allowed to move on to do the same to others.

    Reply

  3. James Brown
    October 23, 2018 @ 12:15 pm

    Skandia/OMI was desperate to sell the high-risk products which gave it the best commissions. The FCA would never have let them get away with this in the UK – so they decided to dump them overseas. To do this they offered large commissions as inducements to so-called “Independent Financial Advisers” (IFAs). Despite their claims, these people were rarely properly regulated or qualified and were operating illegally in these countries.

    Skandia did not do adequate financial analysis of these high-risk products.

    They did not check the IFAs.

    They did not do adequate background checks on people behind the funds on their platform.

    In some cases, they had no idea what the money would be used for.

    There were so many middle-men taking their cut that it was unlikely that investors would ever see any return. Not only that, but it was almost impossible to withdraw money without heavy penalties – even when money had been held for several years. Some investments have been frozen for several years and Skandia maintain that they may be released at some stage, but there has been little progress. You have the choice of writing off your investments or letting Skandia bleed them dry through continuing administrative charges.

    Skandia was particularly active in South-Easrt Asia. Investors in Thailand and the Philippines have obtained SEC judgements of fraud against IFAs in these countries, only for the IFAs to flee. There is evidence that Skandia had been made aware that one of their biggest disasters, LM Australia, was a Ponzi scheme. They continued to sell it and it went bust.

    This was not a case of careless or greedy investors. Most were ordinary people who thought they were being prudent in seeking low-risk products, through regulated advisers and financial institutions formerly thought to be reputable. The 2008 banking crisis showed that nobody was reputable. As soon as one institution found a way of fleecing its clients (Subprime, PPI, fixing LIBOR, etc) the rest did the same. Insurance companies are no different.

    Skandia even acted as a platform for a fund set up by one of the IFAs. They could have had no idea where the money would be sent as the prospectus made it clear that absolute secrecy was necessary, supposedly to protect hedging operations. This was in contravention of anti-money laundering legislation. Funds could have been used to finance arms, drugs or terrorism. In fact, some of the money was sent back to companies where the IFA and his colleagues were officers. These companies never made any sales but paid large fees to their officers.

    Skandia/OMI has a Complaints Department but it is simply for PR. They considered it “inappropriate” to give details of background checks on IFAs or to give the names of people behind funds. Where the evidence of fraud was completely overwhelming they just referred clients back to their IFA. They justified their charges as “high set up costs”, even though they did no proper analysis. The high costs were simply the commissions paid.

    What recourse do you have? The FCA will refer you to the Financial Ombudsman, who will refer you to the IOM Financial Ombudsman. By now you may have run out of time. When there is compelling evidence they advise that you can take legal action – at your own cost and risk, against an entity with huge resources. Some people contacted their MPs, who referred them to the FCA – and so on…..

    Skandia’s approach has been to try and rebrand itself a few times, in order to escape from its shady past. Other insurance companies have done the same. Sadly, they still appear to be pushing the same garbage. The best thing is just to avoid them all.

    Reply

    • Angie
      October 23, 2018 @ 1:59 pm

      So, in other words Old Mutual are just crooks.

      Reply

  4. James Brown
    October 23, 2018 @ 3:43 pm

    All of the comments above are supported by solid documentary evidence. You can make your own conclusions.
    You also need to ask why Skandia rebranded as Old Mutual, then as Quilter.
    If you Google using “Royal Skandia scam” you will find a lot of people complaining, plus articles from respected newspapers explaining how these worthless products were sold. A Google search on “Old Mutual scam” pushes these comments further down the page and allows Old Mutual to replace them with their own warnings to clients to beware of scams. Not surprisingly, they don’t attribute blame to themselves.
    They are the same people and they still appear to be pushing the same products.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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