Easier ways to skin a cat...

[insecurities]

WARNING: Don't let banks act on your behalf without your permission everytime...

 

RE Barclays scandle.

 

I worked for Barclays Trust Company as a securities clerk in the late 80's. Our function was to deal with probate, and investing clients money that had been left in a trust estate.

 

When we got told our branch had to reach profit targets of £1million, our managers went through all clients portfolio accounts that did not require permission to act and 'turned them over'.

 

what this means is you look at the list of recommended buys and sells from the economics department, and action them indescriminately.

 

WHY?

 

cos you collect 1.5-2.5% commission each time. We reached out target in less than 72hrs!

 

what i noticed is that they only did this to accounts not requiring clients consent. i also noticed that the same portfolio's that required clients permission performed better that year earning 25-30% return, whereas, the former only gained 15-20%.

 

i asked about it, and was told that it was not illegal, as the FSA regulation would consider if the client could have done better leaving money in a savings a/c. As the return was still higher, there was no case to answer.

 

This is why the Robin Hood tax idea would fail, as with the introduction of advanced algorithm sell/buy triggers, the rate of 'turning over' our pension funds has gone stratospheric, whenever they want to raise profits. Even if the commission rate reduces to 0.5%, when you spin it faster it is shaving our retirement funds needlessly.

[BankFodder]

Thank you for this.

 

Would you be interested in talking to us privately about this. I think that what you have to say is very important.

You could send me an email at our admin address with "turnover " in the subject line

 

Thanks

[insecurities]

I remember my first day on the job. I had an introduction welcome from the regional head.

 

He sat me in his big office and explained that there were 2 basic things I had to understand:

 

1. I would not be getting an overdraft facility. The reason: Because if I could not look after my own money properly, then how could I be expected to look after others!

2. Keep my nose clean, and there would be a healthy pension at the end.

 

I was 18. A quick calculation told me that 47 yrs of towing the line, and I would eventually get my reward. The scary thing that followed in the 2 yrs I eventually gave them, was the number of bank managers who's estates we ended up dealing with, where they had snuffed it within 6 months of retiring!

 

The core reason for the demise of your pension funds:

1. The initial fee that gets taken out, means you don't actaully get any return accumulated till after first 3-5 yrs on your contributions ( i learnt this from a 6 week trial working as a financial consultant for Laurentian Life)

 

2. Brokers fees get paid on selling as well as buying, regardless of whether the stock makes profit. This is why bankers bonuses are made even on an economic downturn. With the example I have started in this post, what it implies, like setting the LIBEL rate, is that senior fund managers can decide what is a satisfactory return rate they think can be paid on hedge funds. From this they can set the turnover rate to apply to the holding stock. They can sell it and buy it back to themselves on an automated merry go round, picking up the commission each time.

 

When you consider the global trading levels each day, which runs into trillions, it is impossible to prove this, unless you specifically know where to look.

The bankers who seem to make the biggest bonuses, seem to be clever mathematicians who can devise smart algorithms to accelerate the computers ability to place buys and sells on the market.