VouchedFor refunds adviser for poor quality leads

Kim Barrett, managing director of Barretts Financial Solutions, told FTAdviser he wrote to VouchedFor on 7 March saying he would take the firm to court over the issue, after complaining about the quality of leads he received since signing up to the service last year.

Mr Barrett said he has paid £1,956 for two successful leads since last year. He said he raised objections many times with the company, which agreed to refund two fees from January totalling £165.60 - which Barrett said were for “rubbish” leads.

Since then, VouchedFor has charged the adviser another £104 for a lead, which Mr Barrett has appealed.

This was followed by advance notice of charges on 4 March for a further four enquiries, one of which had an unobtainable phone number and email address, while with another Mr Barrett said he heard nothing back from after calling and emailing.

I blew my stack, cancelled my direct debit and fired off a letter. Kim Barrett

With the third lead, a woman hung up on the adviser, Mr Barrett said, and after speaking to the person on the fourth lead, it became apparent his services were not for her.

He said the latest notice of charge for £348 was the last straw: “I blew my stack, cancelled my direct debit and fired off a letter to VouchedFor threatening court action unless they refund £309.60.”

Mr Barrett said the quality of interactions has been poor for long time, adding: “We seem to be doling out plenty of money that doesn’t seem to go anywhere.”

Adam Price, VouchedFor’s founder, said that in 2015, Mr Barrett received 17 enquiries through the website, including four which were refunded as they fell within the company’s refund policy.

“This is lower than normal, with the average adviser receiving 27 enquiries in 2015. Kim paid VouchedFor a total of £784 in enquiry charges and £490 in monthly subscription charges, totalling £1,274 excluding VAT.

“From those 17 enquiries, Kim states two decided to become clients - below the 20 per cent average conversion rate of advisers on VouchedFor.

“We don’t know specifically how much Kim earned from those clients, but industry averages suggest advisers earn £3,250 per new client over a three-year time frame, approximately six times what Kim paid VouchedFor.

Mr Price said that since 1 February, when the new qualification processes and enhanced refund policy came into place, Mr Barrett has received six enquiries, most of which came last week.

“Unfortunately, our new checks failed for an extremely abnormal proportion of these six enquiries.

“Nonetheless, Kim is protected by our new refund policy, and will be refunded for four of these six enquiries. To put that into context, advisers usually request refunds for less than 10 per cent of enquiries. Kim has had a very abnormal experience over the last one to two weeks.”

He added that as a gesture of goodwill, VouchedFor will waive Mr Barrett’s two outstanding enquiry charges and invite him to join the ‘Pro Lite’ membership plan.

VouchedFor recently increased its fees on the basis that it was vetting enquiries so that they were more suitable.

Andy Brooks, chartered financial adviser and director at Brooks Wealth Management, said he prefers Unbiased, because for a one-off payment people have the option of contacting you or not, whereas VouchedFor actively looks for leads, which can be of a variable quality.

“I’ve recently received an advance of charge note of £288 and the leads are of very varied quality, so I’m not sure this would be a good use of this marketing budget, but as I have a choice whether to interact with them, I’m therefore unwilling to critique VouchedFor.

“On balance, VouchedFor has paid for itself this year for me.”