Well, until the latest change in Dec, when everyone got shunted to the 'quarterly £22.50 account for plus SIPP addition' charging model as part of the merger with TD.
Now, I paid II £144.00 in Feb 2017 under the legacy annual one-fee-for-everything model. On moving me to the new £22.50 plus SIPP model starting in Jan, though, II have so far refused to reimburse the portion of this £144.00 that would be unused where I have to start paying the new fees from the start of Jan 2018. We're probably talking about no more than 2/12 of £144, so £24 or less, but it's my £24 dammit!
Two questions, then:
- Is anyone else in the same boat? If so, what happened? Have II refunded you any unused fee portion, or otherwise reimbursed the difference? How long did resolving any problems take? Do you know of a particular individual within II who understands the complete picture here?
- Has anyone retained (virtual, online) 'paperwork' relating to the legacy annual charging scheme? Everything I had was in II's old secure message system, and has been totally wiped 1984-style with the platform switch to the TD version. I no longer have any access to it, and didn't save copies before the platform switch, but I am pretty certain I did not imagine this single annual charge legacy policy.
In generally I have up to now been pretty happy with II; unlike many folk hereabouts, it seems. I don't suppose I will move my SIPP on account of this, since II are still attractively priced for what I hold. It is however somewhat worrying that this hasn't been resolved in six months (or more accurately, it looked like it was resolved when one of my fee payments showed as PAID without me actually paying it, which would have been fine except that then suddenly it wasn't again for no explicable reason). I also count seven separate staff involved in not yet resolving this issue. I would imagine at this point that II's costs arguing this far exceed the amount under dispute, which seems wasteful.
Anyway, anyone with any further ideas to offer? Please stay on topic. Further general rants about II's service may or may not be valid, but won't help me sort out this specific issue. Thanks.