1.3K views
8 comments

I recently read on the {{{Redacted}}} and article whose headline screamed - "How do they get away with it..."

The following text is from an advertising promotion in the public domain placed by their head of recruitment, on N Eaton:

Locations:

Middle East – Dubai Qatar, Saudi Arabia.

Europe - The Netherlands, Brussels, Germany, Sweden, Italy, Poland, Spain, Switzerland, Ireland.

Rest of the World - Australia, Mexico, Brazil.

Specialties:Financial Adviser resourcing for multi-award winning {{{Redacted}}} (ranked UK's 4th fastest growing firm in the Sunday Times Fast Track 100).

Attract highly qualified, market leading, client focussed Financial Advisers by offering a significantly differentiated organisation to 'Partner' with.

{{{Redacted}}}’s mission to bring positive change to international financial services, exporting UK best practice and introducing standards where few existed, placing {{{Redacted}}} decades ahead of our competitors.

FACT - UK BEST PRACTICE INVOLVES BEING PROPERLY AUTHORISED AND LICENSED IN THE COUNTRY WHERE YOU CONDUCT FINANCIAL SERVICES BUSINESS

FACT - IN SAUDI ARABIA, AUSTRALIA, BRAZIL AND MEXICO {{{Redacted}}} DO NOT HAVE A FINANCIAL SERVICES LICENSE TO OPERATE IN THESE COUNTRIES

How do YOU get away with it {{{Redacted}}}?

------------------------------------------------ />

LVP CASE ID 16-V0010 – DECISION SUMMARY

On March 30, 2016, Complainant submitted a complaint in accordance with the Legitimacy Verification Program (“LVP”). The complaint alleged posts # 308709, 370884, 437762, 440080, 443749, and 453772 (the “Posts”) contained statements in violation of Pissed Consumer’s Terms of Use. The Posts’ authors (“Posters”) were offered an opportunity to respond to the complaint, as provided in LVP Rule 9, but each failed to do so. Thus, the Posts and the supplemental information provided by Complainant’s general counsel constitute the LVP Record. Having considered the LVP Record, the Third Party Neutral finds and holds as follows: It is more likely than not that the statements in each of the Posts are defamatory, untruthful and inaccurate and, therefore, violate Pissed Consumer’s Terms of Use. Accordingly, Complainant’s name should be removed from each post at issue, including in all comments to the Posts, and the URLs should be changed to remove reference to the Complainant.

Dated: May 13, 2016

Monetary Loss: $1.

Do You Have Something To Say ?
Write a review

Comments

Terms of Service
Post Comment
Cancel
Anonymous
#1141306

*NOTICE OF COMPLAINT*

Please take notice that Complainant has initiated a Complaint against this Post due to alleged violations of Pissed Consumer’s Terms of Use (http://www.pissedconsumer.com/tos.txt) pursuant to Pissed Consumer’s Legitimacy Verification Program. To receive a copy of the Complaint send an email that includes the review number for this Post to lvp@pissedconsumer.com requesting a copy.

You, the Poster, have a right to respond to the Complaint to establish the truth of the Post’s statements. If you intend to respond, you have 20 days from the date this Notice was posted to answer the Complaint. The Answer Form (https://s3.amazonaws.com/pissedconsumer/legal/LVP+Answer+Form.pdf) must be submitted to lvp@pissedconsumer.com within 20 days of this Notice being posted. Failure to submit an Answer within 20 days waives your right to participate in the Legitimacy Verification Program as to this particular Complaint.

All Legitimacy Verification Program disputes are decided by an independent attorney who is not an employee of Pissed Consumer and whose firm has contracted with Pissed Consumer to provide attorneys who will serve as Third-Party Neutrals in conformity with the rules of the Legitimacy Verification Program.

Pissed Consumer WILL NOT reveal your identity or email address to Complainant without your express consent or pursuant to a subpoena or court order.

For more information regarding the Legitimacy Verification Program, please refer to the program’s rules found at http://www.pissedconsumer.com/static/legitimacy-verification-program-rules-and-conditions.html.

LVP ID: 16-v0010.

Anonymous
London, England, United Kingdom #820145

Right, being an Ex-pat I am constantly bombarded by calls from individuals wanting to advise me on how best to invest my money. I have also been approached on several occasions to work for at least 2 of the companies that continually ring me to offer financial advice. I have also had the pleasure of attending a week long training course offered by one of these companies for ME to become a Financial Advisor for them despite having never sold Financial Services before.

They delivered on not one assurance during the week offering me a post not on the list I was assured I could choose from and although several of the people attending the week were undoubtedly suitable several were clearly 'Dodgy Geezers' 'Secondhand Car Dealer types' whilst I have no problem with them, I certainly wouldn't give them my money to invest and was gob-smacked when the 'Dodgy Geezers' got offered the roles of their choice.

I would never buy anything (Double Glazing / Financial Advise etc) from a cold caller on the phone and sadly this is how these companies tend to operate.

They pay their staff (usually) a minimal wage basing the thousands they assure you that you can earn purely on commission and appear to have a high turnover of staff (as I said I have been approached at least 10 times by 2 companies) and would not ever invest with a so called expert who only gets paid on commission especially having read the numerous negative posts - my advice ignore them like the plague, do your due diligence and research where you invest your money - all they are interested in ultimately is the commission they will get from investing your money - promising you a quick buck / easy money - sit back and repent at your leisure you have been warned.

Anonymous
to ***sumer Champion #882757

I had the same experience as you on the devere / PIC course. Loads of sales people, many with no FS background.

I was offered a post in Dubai or Moscow rather than in Europe where I was told all along I could go. Just a number / resource to them, to be used as they see fit.

There were 22 on that course and a year later not one of them was still there. 'Mud at a wall.'

Anonymous
London, England, United Kingdom #814064

Dear Anonymous 1

For the sake of clarity, if you look at the websites of the regulators in the countries mentioned, you will see that lists are published of authorised firms. {{{Redacted}}} are not shown on these lists.

Further, if the lists are not there / not available, you can look at the regulations in these countries then you will see that a license is needed to operate within the territorial boundaries. {{{Redacted}}} do not have / hold these licenses.

As I have said, the information is within the public domain if you know where to look.

http://aesinternational.com/join-aes

Further, if you look at the {{{Redacted}}} website, you will see that UK qualifications are NOT required for advisers producing £75K per annum or less. This is despite the fact that the {{{Redacted}}} publicity machine delivers a mantra based on exporting UK best practice and only employing the best advisers.

I repeat my question - {{{Redacted}}} , how do you get away with it??

After all the {{{Redacted}}} website says one of the key differentiators in 'transparency'.......... Yours Anonymous

Anonymous
#786500

Still not had my question answered though...

Anonymous
#786277

I do not work for a competitor, I just dislike people who make a living from purposeful misrepresentation.

How do I know these things? Very simply My friend the information I refer to is in the public domain

Anonymous
Hanau Am Main, Hesse, Germany #784829

Having been involved in offshore financial services in Hong Kong over a large number of years, I baulk at the obviouse tactics of so called professionals slandering the names of their competitors to try and gain points by posting such utter rubbish. I would much rather see financial consultants concentrating on their clients needs and investments than taking time to rubbish the industry they pretend to represent as professionals.

I am not suggesting for 1 minute that there are not some genuine complaints on this ridiculously unregulated web site.

But by allowing totally anonymous posts and holding absolutely no one responsible for their actions is simply negligent and irresponsible. All companies from Walmart to the dry cleaners in your local town will receive complaints at one time or another, and then the person with the complaint goes to the supplier to sort it out.

If the supplier does not deal with it in a professional manner post on sites like this and get the truth out there, of course give the post the credibility it deserves by using your real name. By doing this gripe sites like this will become a valuable resource and stop all this in fighting between ex employees and competing companies.

Anonymous
#783519

I've read a few complaints about various firms. How do you know they don't have a license?

You May Also Like