Aes International Reviews

Show reviews that mention
pissed consumer’s consumer’s terms lvp record statements violation issue counsel complaint accordance post
Filter review
  1. 2 reviews
  2. 0 reviews
  3. 0 reviews
  4. 0 reviews
  5. 0 reviews

Resolved issues AES

1.3
What can I say Sam Instone called me went through all my issues complaints, agreed it had not been dealt with in the best way, offered me compensation which i was happy to accept, and made good on his word, So i would say to any persons having any issues with this company Get hold of this man, he will resolve it in the best possible way and fast also. cannot thank Sam instone enough, the best way to reach him if the office won't give his details is on google he is very well connected.. the power of this platform is incredible to you all thinking of writing any complaints about any companies. regards peter
View full review
Comment
Helpful 1 Not helpful 0
1 comment
#1541469

Well he didn't compensate me for my losses

Reply
1 0
ID
#1284128 Review #1284128 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Reason of review
resolved issue
New Reviewer

1.0
BEWARE THIS COMPANY AES INTERNATIONAL TAKES YOUR MONEY AND CHARGES YOU VAT AGAINST CHARGES WHEN THEY SHOULD NOT. ALSO, THEY DO NOT LOOK AFTER YOUR POLICY JUST TAKE MONEY. AND MOVE YOU TO A DIFFERENT JURISDICTION TO ESCAPE THE UK OMBUDSMAN DO NOT TRADE WITH THEM DO NOT...
View full review
View full review
Comment
Helpful 1 Not helpful 0
5 comments
#1503840

Being the adviser mentioned in this complaint and having worked in financial services for 15 years and never having a complaint held against me during that time (UK FCA register can be checked to confirm the same) I feel compelled to post my comments.This client’s primary complaint related to issues concerning his pension after the period in which I arranged the initial admin (first couple of months) thus I had no involvement in the management of his policy after this initial stage, though I understand that his main complaint was in relation to VAT charged against fees.However, a secondary issue emerged in relation to the change of AES branch for his policy from the UK to one of our other EU branches in Poland (as a consequence of a change of adviser who was based in Poland), of which the client felt wasn’t made clear.As the advice provided, within AES, is of the exact same standard whether it emanates from the UK, Poland, UAE or anywhere else, and as this client wasn’t a resident of the UK himself, it wasn’t immediately obvious to me/us at the time (we’ve changed our protocol since) that a ‘flag’ needed to be raised to signal a change in jurisdiction, for his policy, between EU branches - as the advice provided is the same irrespective of branch location.As per this client’s latest post, really happy to see that this client’s complaint has now been resolved to his satisfaction.

Reply
0 0
View more comments
ID
#1278902 Review #1278902 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Cons
  • There way of handling a complaint
Reason of review
Poor customer service
Loss
$25000
Preferred solution
Let the company propose a solution

Rupert Bastick - History repeating itself - how can this happen?

Aes International - Rupert Bastick - History repeating itself - how can this happen?
Rupert Bastick was the owner, and director of a UK financial services company that went Bankrupt in October 2010. See attached. He now appears again as a director of this new, international mortgage brokerage, again, out of Exeter. For the last 3 -4 years he has been employed as General Manager by AES International in Qatar - a position of trust. He had originally applied to join one of the companies in Qatar that is actually regulated there, via the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority (QFCRA) but was rejected because he is not considered 'fit for purpose' in the UK and the same applies in Qatar. It is easy to find a large number of experienced financial planners that left AES Qatar since he joined, preferring not to be associated with him. Beware of being asked to pay fees upfront. There are better options out there for expatriates looking for a mortgage.
View full review
Comment
Helpful 19 Not helpful 0
ID
#1128728 Review #1128728 is a subjective opinion of poster.
New Reviewer

I lost to date $111,000 on an initial $160,000 Generali Vision Plan sold to me by an inept John Viney AES advisor. At the time I signed up I was working in Iraq worth little internet access so it was not clear what I was signing up to and difficult to research. This...
View full review
View full review
Comment
Helpful 6 Not helpful 5
8 comments
#1420726

Unsurprising. AES International sells endowment savings plans with up front commission. Anybody buying a Genarali policy from AES International will lose first 2 years premiums to AES International commission.

Reply
1 0
View more comments
Resolved
ID
#950158 Review #950158 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Leidschendam, South Holland
Service
Aes International Generali Worldwide Vision Savings Plan
Cons
  • No monitoring of vision fund
Reason of review
Poor customer service
Loss
$111000
Preferred solution
Full refund

AES International - Financial Service Review

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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 8 Not helpful 10
8 comments
#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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
#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.

Reply
2 0
#882757
@PissedConsumer820145

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.'

Reply
0 0
#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

Reply
2 0
#786500

Still not had my question answered though...

Reply
0 0
#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

Reply
0 0
#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.

Reply
2 0
#783519

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

Reply
0 0
View more comments (7)
ID
#453772 Review #453772 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Guildford, England
Loss
$1

AES International - Poor Service Review

http://{{{Redacted}}}-nordic.com/ This is the website of {{{Redacted}}} Nordic and from it comes the following: {{{Redacted}}}Nordic At {{{Redacted}}} Nordic we specialise in delivering Scandinavian-based clients bespoke, independent financial advice. This from a leading European regulator: "The European Directive (MiFID) 2004/39/EC on market in financial instruments does not regulate the provision or performance of investment services in 3rd countries....." So {{{Redacted}}} ARE authorised to operate from a branch in Sweden. {{{Redacted}}} ARENT authorised to use that branch to sell cross border from there into other EEA countries (there cross broder permission comes from the UK). If you are a consumer and are thinking about talking to these people then do your research. All of the information available in the public domain shows that {{{Redacted}}} are deceitful at best, liars at worse. Caveat empteor........ More to follow ------------------------------------------------ /> 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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 3 Not helpful 4
2 comments
#1420727

No service at AES International. Flog the savings plan, collect the commission and don't turn up ever again. Tens of thousands of pounds lost to commission i reckon.

Reply
1 0
#1141309

*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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
View more comments (1)
ID
#443749 Review #443749 is a subjective opinion of poster.

AES International - Financial Service Review

On the website of the Capital Markets Authority in Uganda is a public notice. This states that the public should not deal with anyone selling offshore funds and investment plans in the country, and those persons doing so would not be protected by relevant Uganda legislation. Thats clear. Why, then do {{{Redacted}}} have an adviser operating in the country - one Mr Niekerk - who is openly promoting and marketing his services in Kampala and also via Youtube / Twitter and other sources?? If you look behind the gloss of the {{{Redacted}}} website, the flowery language used and material you can find elsewhere, you may be surprised by what you see. Everything stated above is in the public domain. The regulator has been informed. ------------------------------------------------ /> 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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 5 Not helpful 7
5 comments
#1141304

*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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
#712092

@ odd thing to post - you are right about the qualification standards. this is one or many comments made by {{{Redacted}}} which is not entirely accurate. Another is the fact they are a "well-regulated company" and this is the point of this posting.

@ the man - the Act provide a definition of 'unit' but the is silent on its application throughout the rest of the text. AES have a platform product which may fall under the definition of 'unit' The regulator was therefore contacted and this query raised to see if the 'platform' is caught by the Act. However your posting has got me thinking so I have read the Insurance Regulations Act.

This:

a. requires all brokers who sells life insurance to be duly authorised and

b. Is silent on whether individuals who are working alone can be authorised or whether authorisation ca only be applied to legal or corporate bodies.

Further investigation leads to the quote - "life cover may include investments depending on the structure of the product"

Also a review of the Uganda Assoc of Ins Brokers - www.uaib.org - shows that a number of firms are properly authorised under the Insurance Act to sell life and pension products.

Either way AES have some serious questions to answer.....

I am not a ex-employee of the company (or an ex-IFA) but there is an increasing body within the industry who are trying to take action against blantant misrepresentation, especially fom those firms who seek to hold the moral high ground.

Awards? Not is a position to comment, that is one for the awards panel.

@the man - you will find that the message behind my postings is sincere and the comments I have made worthy of investigation. there is no mud slinging, name calling or anything similar. You have proved the point of many business leaders that those who come onto pissed consumer to rant, rave, use juvenile icons in their comments are really only suitable to have their views disregarded.

I will make no further comment on this site

Reply
0 0
#711637

@ The Man

I just had a look at the links you posted. Have you seen the comments on the Economist article?

There appears to be a little confusion as to the qualification requirements needed. On the one hand the article states that the advisers must meet UK qualification standards and yet the comments suggest that that is not the case.

What are the qualification requirements? If they are not at UK standards, then someone needs to talk to the Economist and correct this error.

And, what on earth does it matter what the UK rules are or what some UK compliance officer says? Uganda decides what is suitable for Uganda. :roll

Reply
0 0
#708706

hahaha, The Truth Spreader, mmm, it must be a new kind of "Super hero" because I’ve never seen him in any of the SmallVille episodes...

After reading your post (good thing you didn't put your name down ! lol) ,the "I am a TOOL" spot is however still open for auditions, sounds like they were waiting just for you to come along and we have to all concur...a perfect match. :grin

Actually, the poster can be your sidekick...aka, the freaky stalker or something.

Can you both still be reached at *** HQ...what was it again?? oh yes: i_am_a_tool@***.com ?

This is the sandbox for the big children, you're clearly out of your league bucko...are you like 5 ??

Have you bothered reading the act properly and interpreting the act? "Doh...what is an act?" you ask? Well, not quite the same as the comedy act your portraying here, that I can assure you, but let's try get down to your level.

Offshore adviser activities can be "limited" to or construed as advising on the sale of insurance products. I have it on good authority that ALL {{{Redacted}}} business must be processed through {{{Redacted}}}’ London office, where they have an active and alert UK compliance function, so an advisor cannot provide advice other than in relation to such products.

Turning now to the analysis and the Act: in this regard, section 33 of the Act seems irrelevant. That section prohibits acting as an investment representative (i.e.: in broad terms assisting an investment adviser) without a licence. The advisor in this case is not doing so, f& rom what I can tell your friend in Uganda seems to work alone? :eek

Section 32 of the Act prohibits a person acting as an investment adviser in Uganda without him/ her having the appropriate licence. “Investment adviser” is tightly defined under section 1(t) of the Act. Within that section, subsection (iii) concerns the “management of a portfolio of securities”. As indicated above, it can strongly be argued that this is not what he does. His actions would then be limited to advice on insurance products, not so? :x

Subsections (i) and (ii) (and indeed (iii)) of subsection 1(t) state that being an investment adviser means (inter alia) carrying on a business of advising concerning securities (and therefore not any other product). “Securities” are themselves tightly defined under section 1(hh) of the Act. They include government-issued stock (etc.), debentures, stocks, shares (etc.) issued by a corporate body, rights warrants, options and futures, and instruments commonly known as securities. he could easily claim that NONE of these descriptions appears to fit the products that the he advises on, which are (to iterate) insurance products. :p

Dude again, are you SURE you're not 5? Just way, it will explain everything.

I wonder how they came by all of these...? (copied from an online post)

Latest awards from Virgin's SIR Richard Branson: http://goo.gl/VKZ1q

? The field-marshal of finance: http://goo.gl/vF1Y9A (The Economist)

? UK Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year announced http://goo.gl/QacFb

? Bringing out the BIG GUNS: http://www.international-adviser.com/profiles-and-analysis/profiles/bringing-out-the-big-guns

? ADVISORS: The good, the bad and the downright ugly ! http://www.expatmoneychannel.com/content/ifas-good-bad-and-downright-ugly

? Some older news but good history: http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/new-model-adviser-profile-gunning-for-bad-practice/a357852

? Our International awards: http://goo.gl/JdRzh and http://goo.gl/6WuQt

C'mooooooon, you're 5 !!! :) I just KNEW it !! lol :zzz

Reply
0 0
#704627

I am grateful for being pointed in the direction of a comment from the adviser named above which shows the contemptuous attitude {{{Redacted}}} appear to have toward being properly regulated in all countries where they operate.

"Being regulated by a licensing authority is a joke........"

This is a direct quote.

And for the joker who thinks this is *** then refer to the following link - http://www.cmauganda.co.ug/legalcompliance/shore-fund-and-investment-plans.

This posting does not contain lies, innuendo, slander or anything similar. It is the truth and is posted because the lies and misrepresentation MUST STOP in the offshore financial services industry.

The regulator has been informed and more truthful, verifiable comments will follow.

Reply
0 0
View more comments (4)
ID
#440080 Review #440080 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Guildford, England

AES International - Advisers Review

If, after reading the {{{Redacted}}} website you are considering meeting one of their advisers, ask yourself the following: 1. Why do they have new advisers in Mexico without a license to operate there? 2. Why do they have advisers operating in Brazil without a license to operate there? 3. Why is the firm advertising for advisers to work in Saudi when no regulatory license is held? 4. Why, when the policy of the Central Bank of Bahrain specifically permits this, does the {{{Redacted}}} Dubai website clearly state they are servicing clients there? All of this information is in the public domain so if you are tempted into a meeting then do your research first. Look beyond the glossy image and you may be surprised by what you find..... More to follow More follows ________________________________________________ /> 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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 4 Not helpful 5
2 comments
#1446599

From what I can see, AES are now one of the few ethical advisers around in Dubai. They do not sell long term savings plans and certainly their senior advisers are UK charted.

Reply
0 0
#1141307

*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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
View more comments (1)
ID
#437762 Review #437762 is a subjective opinion of poster.

Beware: They only hire failed advisors

Don't bother with {{{Redacted}}} as they promote the hiring of failed, fired and untrustworthy advisors from other companies as a recruitment strategy. Test the next one that calls you by asking how long they have worked in this industry? Then ask how long they have been with {{{Redacted}}}. Chances are they have worked for more than 1 other company in their time. They will try and tell you it was career progression but know its poor performance and greed that makes an advisor jump ship. By my reckoning these cavalier salesmen and women move from place to place miselling and trying to avoid commission clawbacks. Sam Instone the CEO is clearly in favor of this strategy, it's been part of {{{Redacted}}}' recruitment plan for years. ------------------------------------------------ /> 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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 15 Not helpful 27
26 comments
#1446601

The comment on AES hiring failed financial advisers is way off the mark now.I have dealt with Mr Ritchie and he is super qualified and definitely did not offer me a long term servings plan. I had tried other advisers, namely Finsbury Associates and Holborne as well and both of these organizations had their advisers suggesting a 25 and 20 year Generali plan (may be they have a special deal on)Tom

Reply
0 0
#1142762

*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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
#1142741

Why do Pissed C not permit post here?

Reply
0 0
#713595

I find that what-ever negative is being said about {{{Redacted}}} staff and figures to be contrary to what I read and what the rest of the professional industry seems to be saying about them.

In fact, I don't know a single IFA who has not been with a few firms and I cannot see why changing jobs could be construed as failure.

I also find it curious that everyone who writes negative comments about certain IFA's mysteriously lack any references and/or proof of such allegations or accusations in their posts. Must we like "believe" you...ow what? C'mon now, grow up people.

This is what I've gogoled:

? The field-marshal of finance: http://goo.gl/vF1Y9A (The Economist)

? Bringing out the BIG GUNS: http://www.international-adviser.com/profiles-and-analysis/profiles/bringing-out-the-big-guns

? ADVISORS: The good, the bad and the downright ugly ! http://www.expatmoneychannel.com/content/ifas-good-bad-and-downright-ugly

? International awards: http://goo.gl/JdRzh and http://goo.gl/6WuQt

Then there's CEO Sam Instone's Ernst & Young entrepreneur of the year short-listing and some other international industry awards that can be seen on-line. Just google, its as easy as that and this took 2 mins to gather this little bit of info.

They don't seem to be doing too bad at all it would seem? Sunday Times Virgin top 100 Fastest growing financial services firm in the UK? Sound impressive actually, it does not speak of low turnover, drop-outs, failed advisors and what-not to me. On top of that they're FCA regulated in the UK as well.

Sorry, I just don't get it....

Reply
2 0
#1052628
@PissedConsumer713595

My {{{Redacted}}} adviser sold me....a first time investor, a structured product designed for professional investors only, 95% of my money was put into 1 product...I lost €112,000 in one year. This of course was after he sold me the offshore bond...where he made himself a whopping 8%.

{{{Redacted}}} are not interested !

They have got their money.

2 years later I am waiting to hear from the DGS re my complaint.

...will all be in my book in due course...

Reply
0 0
#1446605
@PissedConsumer713595

I did google your poInts. Your facts are correct.I think the negative comments will be from other jelous advisers who want to slag off one of the only decent advisers avilable to expats.

Reply
0 0
#713588

I don't beleive that {{{Redacted}}} is a scam company. However the fact is that over 80% of Advisors at {{{Redacted}}} have been unsuccessful financial advisors at their previous firms.

These consultants are therefore easy targets to recruit. Sam Instone's philosophy on recruitment is 'go for the low hanging fruit'. This is the reason why as a company they carry so many advisors who do very little business. It is also the reason that they do not let any other advisors know how their colleagues are doing and are not transparrent with their consultants business figures.

If theywere then this would highlight a huge failing in their overall ability as financial advisors. {{{Redacted}}} started out as a company on the right tracks with good intentions but in recent years has unfortunatly become known as a good place to hide for poor advisors.

Reply
0 0
#715732
@PissedConsumer713588

I couldnt agree more with your comments. Check the credentials of the last three advisers they have recruited and the practice still continues.

I also agree with the centre part of the posting about carrying advisers who do little business. With this in mind, the fact that adviser numbers are falling (per Linkedin) and two offices are about to locate to cheaper premises (Qatar and Switzerland) just how do they win awards for the fastest growing financial services business? I spoke to one of the firms who run the awards and was told that the accolade (sic)is given out on the basis of turnover, ie gross sales only.....

Doesn't sense to me. Can anyone come on here and explain??

Reply
0 0
#716295
@PissedConsumer713588

Thanks for posting those links, they help with this discussion greatly.

I note that the comments on The Economist article suggest that there is an issue with the qualifications of the advisers that are not in the UK.

The Expat Money Channel link you posted does help with this. Watch the video of a Mr Barnes of the Fry Group. He makes it clear that there is a flood of advisers out of the UK who cannot qualify in the UK. He states that we should be looking for qualifications beyond the UK Diploma standard and not be taken in by a few certificates.

So, are all {{{Redacted}}} advisers qualified to the UK standards or not and should we be looking for higher standards of qualification than this in any case?

Reply
0 0
#957835
@PissedConsumer713588

I wonder why you are scared to show your name? Got something to hide?

Reply
0 0
View more comments (25)
ID
#370884 Review #370884 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Dubai, Dubai

AES International - Generali Vision Review from Zurich, Zurich

Beware: DeVere Group is re-branding!! The new name is {{{Redacted}}}. {{{Redacted}}} has an ex *** from DeVere as Country Manager/ Private Client Adviser named Jonathan Wookey. He has last been seen working for DeVere when he visited me in Basel in Autumn 2011. I can only assume that they due the same scam, robbery, bad financial advise with high charges and hidden fees as Devere did with the Generali vision plan. He advertises himself as "International Wealth Manager serving Expats living in Switzerland" even though he does NOT SEEM TO HAVE ANY FINANCIAL EDUCATION. Please also see http://www.englishforum.ch/finance-banking-taxation/142614-local-financial-advice-expats.html ------------------------------------------------ /> 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
View full review
Comment
Helpful 19 Not helpful 34
13 comments
#1216383

Jonathan Wookey worked for approx 2 years at DeVere and continued to sell many expats very bad financial advise and products.

He fell out with DeVere and started to work for AES International as the Country Manager / Private Client Adviser, where he continued to scam expats and locals to gain commission ruthlessly.

He was made redundant in less than a year and dissapeared to Singapore to work for IFS (2 years).

He is back in Switzerland now and started his own Company as the 'CEO at Summit Wealth AG' (Zug).

Be cautious - he is back!

Reply
0 0
#1142758

*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@***.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@***.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.

Reply
0 0
#897064

So, the Spanish office of {{{Redacted}}}, Premier Pension Solutions, seems to have been booted out of FEIFA.

{{{Redacted}}}is now going to open its own trade body in Dubai with some interesting partners.

Reply
0 0
#607617

Buy list of emails in the net, there are reasonably cheap and may help you to reach an incredible number of people in one hit.

Reply
0 0
#607587

To want to expose bad practice: send the link of this site and threads to everyone you know and ask them to keep sending forward...and just ask people to read and think twice before taking advise from anyone company listed in this site.

Reply
0 0
#594689

I'll repeat what I've said before: If this is not the biggest load of nonsense I've heard in my life ! lol :grin

{{{Redacted}}} achieved Investors in people GOLD award, Virgin Sunday Time Fast Track 100 for 2011 and 2012 ....I mean, just GOOGLE and you'll see.

Devere same aas {{{Redacted}}}??? You must be on drugs ! hahaha

Its like saying, BMW is rebranding to Mercedes, just because someone who worked for one of them joined the other !? I mean, how totally ridiculous to make such outlandish statements...are you like 5 ???

Advisors are very mobile, and with all the unregulated grey area cowboys around I think having an FSA regulated company around is darn good news if you ask me. If you're still with the same IFA you started with, then you're VERY special and you must have it really good.

I guess it goes without saying that the competition would post non factual, misrepresented nonsense like this. :sigh Sis on you all ! Jealousy makes you nasty as the saying goes, and from I've read online...there is MUCH to be jealous about...and NO I don't work for them either.

I just can't sit by and watch such below-rag-standard information get spread around. I've had a professional meeting with an {{{Redacted}}} guy and when you've seen the REST as expats like myself do, you'll know the difference !

Wow, what utter ignorance to run to a platform that you KNOW will post what-ever people barf out at times. :x Get over yourself already...

Reply
0 0
#589376

Get a life people. There is not much point in carrying on talking about IFAs.

The real point is, what kind of people want an unqualified and an unregulated service which will be dealing with your MONEY, very likely will provide you with an advise that even a monkey could reach too? Only *** people! The same goes for those who work for this kind of company. Nobody needs a IFA.

If you want to invest your money? Do your homework and find a top bank or financial institution and they will help you.

Bear this in mind - these organization will have QUALIFIED advisers. So if you put your money through a IFA and get a bad service and poor return - don´t complaint because you are the only one to blame!!

Reply
0 0
#586260

Why someone wants to use this service and have money in an offshore centre?Tax free!

Protection! BUT AT WHAT COST???? Lets take Brazil as an example, its banks weren´t even scratched by the 2008 crisis, they are amongst the best according to data published in the last 2 years and they have products which are very good in terms of returns. If you have 250k dollars to get invited then your returns can be very interesting as you will have access to a PROPER QUALIFIED TRADER which will find solutions so you can reach your return goal and all that is REGULATED!!!

There are people making returns of 15% with property funds - very conservative!! and other people with greater appetite getting 35% in some cases with different solutions.

The message is FORGET THIS offshore and IFAs things - totally unregulated - if you get screwed there will be nothing you can do to help or protect you!!!If you are interested, feel free to drop me a line.

Reply
0 0
#461444

I must apologise Forehead, I misspelled my name earlier. Terrible typo, Hoffman La Roche will employ anyone these days!

Don't pay too much attention to the IP location - companies will route traffic through remote data centres to save money. Anyway, you'd know best, it says you're in the US!

I didn't realise LA was part of Benelux....Reply again and I'll have to post my home address and photo to prove it's me!

Now, back to the matter at hand....

Reply
0 0
#460280

Something is wrong with this, following the link to EnglishForum shows various posts, the ones by poster 2 seem to be from Basel, yet above the IP tracker above shows posting from Berne, and the comments for poster 3 also allude to Basel, and the tracker shows Berne. Poster 2 and 3 must be the same person, and they are in Berne, or very close.

As for {{{Redacted}}} being a Devere spin off, with *** posts like the ones above, how are we to ever know who to believe.

Reply
0 0
View more comments (12)
ID
#308709 Review #308709 is a subjective opinion of poster.
Location
Zurich, Zurich

Why Trust Reviews on PissedConsumer?

  • Professional auto and live moderation
  • 100% user-generated content
  • Equal opportunity and protection
  • Zero tolerance for fake reviews
  • Verified content

For more information read Blog article