CompaniesFeb 5 2015

Manchester banks demanding £1m for advice

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Manchester banks demanding £1m for advice

European Wealth has affirmed an approach of setting no upfront fees and no investment limits for individuals who want a wealth manager in Manchester in an effort to address the advice gap, amid claims from the firm that banks are refusing to talk to anyone with less than £1m.

David Mellett, investment management director and co-head of European Wealth’s Manchester office, said the move was prompted after his team found a wide range of banks in the local area demanding in excess of £1m for clients wishing to access private banking services.

Many banks have closed mainstream advice arms and ceased offering full in-branch advice, instead focusing on private banking options for wealthier clients. Industry commentators have suggested many advisers are following a similar trend up the client value chain.

Mr Mellett said: “Recent regulatory changes under the Retail Distribution Review have dramatically impacted the way consumers are now able to access wealth management services, with many firms requiring clients to place ever greater funds under management to ensure a one-on-one tailored service.

“As a result affluent individuals, businesses owners and charities are increasingly no longer able to enjoy the face-to-face investment advice that they might once have expected.”

Nigel Gilland, fellow co-head of European Wealth’s Manchester office, said that in addition to the banks, a multitude of wealth management firms are now requiring significant minimum investment levels.

“At European Wealth we prefer to take the longer-term view, and in so doing, we believe we are bridging this ever increasing advice gap for clients.

“Indeed, as a firm, we fully understand our clients’ experience of wealth creation and accumulation, thus are able to manage their investments from early in their career through to retirement and estate planning.

Mr Gilland added that as a consequence, “we know that many of the significant portfolios we now manage began at much more modest levels, levels that today would fall short of the minimum requirements being set by others.”

emma.hughes@ft.com