InvestmentsDec 6 2019

Aviva mistake leaves adviser out of pocket

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Aviva mistake leaves adviser out of pocket

An adviser has criticised Aviva’s service after he had to chase the provider when an admin error left him out of pocket.

Ricky Chan, director at IFS Wealth & Pensions, had been underpaid for work for a new client since August but, when he emailed to complain, he received no response.

Mr Chan began working with the new client – who had an old investment bond with Aviva – in August.

After the standard exchange of documents and a new fee arrangement had been set up between the adviser and Aviva, Mr Chan had assumed he would be paid the agreed amount over the following months.

But on double checking the policy document, Mr Chan became concerned he was not being paid the correct fee and emailed Aviva it them to rectify this on November 9.

He received no response. Mr Chan said: “We need to have better communications. I specifically told them the new fee arrangement so you would expect it to be rectified.”

Mr Chan said he expected a faster and more thorough response from the provider, but added he was not surprised by the lack of communication.

He emailed a second time on November 15 and received an acknowledgement email a few days later.

Mr Chan was also concerned it was only “by chance” he had seen the fact he was not being paid the agreed amount.

He said: “It’s obviously something that’s been missed, but it’s not something I should have to double check to make sure it’s being done properly.”

The problems arose when Mr Chan took over the client’s account and arranged a different fee agreement.

The previous adviser had been paid £10 a month from Aviva through the investment bond, but Mr Chan’s new arrangement was for £20 a month.

A spokesperson from Aviva said: “We apologise to Mr Chan for the time it’s taken to resolve his issues and we have now been in contact with him to explain what has happened.

“There was an error in how we set up his fees when he took on this particular client’s investment bond, meaning we have been paying him £10 a month less than we should have. This issue is unique to this particular adviser.”

imogen.tew@ft.com

What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on fa.letters@ft.com to let us know.