Aviva plc Return of Capital Update.

[daveh]

It isn't complicated. They now give the percentage of one's cost that is apportioned to one's remaining Aviva shareholding and the percentage apportioned to the capital return cash. 74.68% and 25.32%
https://static.aviva.io/content/dam/avi ... 202022.pdf

They (Aviva) got a different answer to my initial calculation. It turns out that I forgot to account for the fact that after the consolidation there was only 0.76 of an ordinary share for every B share. Once I added that in to my calculation I got the same answer. Good to follow the workings and calculate it myself so I know how its done if I have to calculate it without input from the company involved in any future such events

[teecee90]

I contacted Halifax about the base cost shown in my portfolio to ask them if it could be corrected (it still shows the original book cost of the original pre-action holding). They told me (via the online chat) that it was not possible to make changes to the book cost following a corporate action and then immediately closed the chat.......

[monabri]

I contacted Halifax about the base cost shown in my portfolio to ask them if it could be corrected (it still shows the original book cost of the original pre-action holding). They told me (via the online chat) that it was not possible to make changes to the book cost following a corporate action and then immediately closed the chat.......

Yet we know it is possible since Interactive Investor have done it! Do they mean their software can't handle it (update the software) or they can't be bothered. Looks like it is a case of the "computer says No!"

[seagles]

I contacted Halifax about the base cost shown in my portfolio to ask them if it could be corrected (it still shows the original book cost of the original pre-action holding). They told me (via the online chat) that it was not possible to make changes to the book cost following a corporate action and then immediately closed the chat.......

Same response at Iweb:-

Hi there on the back of the capital return etc the bookcost will not be amended, this is something as a business we will not process.

They also said they could not comment on what other brokers do.

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

[GoSeigen]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

[daveh]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

And at II you can edit it to whatever you want it to be. I do that to correct it to what I think it should be from my own spreadsheet for the II holding. I then have a separate CGT value that is correct taking account of just the taxable holdings pooled across multiple accounts if held with more than one broker (not much left outside ISAs now).

[moorfield]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

I disagree. In my line of work financial services industry, attention to such detail is important (*), and certainly would demand justification from superiors, auditors, and regulators. Perhaps it's the environment I'm used to, but as a retail customer of the likes of HL, AJBell I would expect the same attention to detail from their helpdesks regardless of how much I'm paying for their service. I mentioned previously that I have not been able to fathom (even after reading through IanTHughes' handy link) how AJ Bell have adjusted my Aviva book cost, and did not get a satisfactory explanation from them.


(*) I have a particular bee in my bonnet at the moment over Alistair Cook's and Joe Root's "joint record" of 10000 runs, as some may have seen me post elsewhere. It isn't a joint record. Again, attention to detail, or lack of ....

[Dod101]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

I do not always agree with GS but here I do 100%. Personally I never use the so called book cost for anything other than a rough idea of my buying price.
I have my own records if I need them. In fact, though, since most of my holdings are in an ISA or a SIPP, it is not much of an issue for me anyway.

Delayed dividend payments are something else and all brokers/ISA and SIPP managers ought to be able to sort that out. It is as far as I can gather an issue between the platform and their custodians as often as not.

Dod

[seagles]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

I do not always agree with GS but here I do 100%. Personally I never use the so called book cost for anything other than a rough idea of my buying price.
I have my own records if I need them. In fact, though, since most of my holdings are in an ISA or a SIPP, it is not much of an issue for me anyway.

Delayed dividend payments are something else and all brokers/ISA and SIPP managers ought to be able to sort that out. It is as far as I can gather an issue between the platform and their custodians as often as not.

Dod

I agree that personal records should be taken and more accurate, but in today's electronic era you would expect the platforms to strive to meet a higher standard. To be honest a few years back I did notice a discrepancy between my records and the platforms, research noted i had made a mistake, so they do have there uses.

Like Dod the vast majority of my assets are now in ISAs or SIPPs so book cost on platforms is not as important as it was, just nice to have. I wonder what would happen with a CGT dispute with HMRC if you used your figures rather than the platform?

[GoSeigen]

I suppose if you pay peanuts for the service we cannot expect "bells and whistles". Delayed dividend payments have become the norm. Glad I have HL for my really important SIPP portfolio.

Exactly right. I think people are being unreasonable here. The book cost figure is at best a notional value for the entertainment of the account holder. No-one should rely on this figure either for their own portfolio analysis or (god forbid) their tax return. Some brokers will try to print a figure that makes some sort of sense. Some might even publish how they calculate it make it marginally useful. Some brokers (e.g. HL) have a system for calculating the value which makes no sense at all AFAICS. Some brokers have software that allows the value to be changed by the account holder, others only by an employee of the broker, and yet others perhaps don't have any facility to update the figure.

It's pointless to treat this as if it is an important service owed to the investor, especially where discount brokers are concerned -- just use it for a very rough finger-in-the-air indication of how your portfolio constituents' prices are moving.


GS

I do not always agree with GS but here I do 100%. Personally I never use the so called book cost for anything other than a rough idea of my buying price.
I have my own records if I need them. In fact, though, since most of my holdings are in an ISA or a SIPP, it is not much of an issue for me anyway.

Delayed dividend payments are something else and all brokers/ISA and SIPP managers ought to be able to sort that out. It is as far as I can gather an issue between the platform and their custodians as often as not.

Dod

I agree that personal records should be taken and more accurate, but in today's electronic era you would expect the platforms to strive to meet a higher standard. To be honest a few years back I did notice a discrepancy between my records and the platforms, research noted i had made a mistake, so they do have there uses.

Like Dod the vast majority of my assets are now in ISAs or SIPPs so book cost on platforms is not as important as it was, just nice to have. I wonder what would happen with a CGT dispute with HMRC if you used your figures rather than the platform?

I think the best standard one could reasonably expect is for the broker to document how the calculation is done. From their perspective though, it's hardly worth it because as soon as they do so their customers will start complaining and want the method changed. And there will never be consensus on how it should actually be done -- think of all the fiddly corporate restructurings that would have to be accommodated for example. Everyone's circumstances are individual and tax laws (if that is the driving force) change.

GS