View more on these topics

Collapse of takeover talks leaves Cofunds in ‘serious mess’

The collapse of takeover talks with AJ Bell has left Cofunds in a “serious mess”, say industry sources.

Last month Money Marketing revealed AJ Bell will not acquire Cofunds after the firm failed to reach a deal with the platform’s parent company, Legal & General.

The two businesses had been in talks over a possible acquisition but decided not to press ahead after a four-week exclusivity period ended without agreement being reached.

Experts say if L&G is unable to find another buyer it faces the stark choice between running the platform down or funding an expensive reinvestment programme.

L&G purchased the remaining 75 per cent of Cofunds it did not already own for £131m in March 2013. The insurer took the initial 25 per cent stake in the platform in 2005.

In July, Money Marketing revealed L&G’s decision to sell Cofunds had been sparked by a move to switch the platform to a different technology provider, Bravura.

Cofunds was considering its options ahead of the contract with current provider IFDS ending in 2017. It is understood Bravura’s new Sonata system had been selected to replace IFDS, but the costs associated with the switch, expected to run to tens of millions of pounds, prompted L&G to start the sale process.

Wealth management firm Novia chief executive Bill Vasilieff says: “One option is to carve up the business into retail and institutional divisions. L&G has a good chance of selling the institutional division but they are in a mess because they have to replatform, which will cost a huge amount of money.

“I expect they would still like to sell the retail business if they could find a buyer.” One industry source says: “AJ Bell was one of the best fits to buy the business, but I still didn’t see why it made sense for them as it would have been such a stressful distraction.

“L&G’s options are to try and find another buyer, run it down or spin it off. It is going to become increasingly difficult to run a profitable business because Cofunds’ profit margins are already low.”

One platform boss adds: “This looks like a serious mess. Cofunds has ancient technology and its  finances could take a turn for the worse when the sunset clause hits next April.

“L&G could either run it down, which means writing off the value of what they paid for it, or spend some serious money to try and make it relevant to the market again.”

The Lang Cat principal Mark Polson says: “The only thing that’s certain is Cofunds needs to move its core infrastructure to a modern platform.

“The biggest platform naturally sets the tone for the market, so it’s important for customers and advisers the right result happens, whatever that is.”

Cofunds, L&G and AJ Bell declined to comment.



Nic Cicutti: Where is the FCA on charges disclosure?

I do not suppose many readers of Money Marketing remember Tim Miller. For those who do not, before his untimely death on a car race track some 15 years ago, Miller was one of the industry’s most highly successful marketing strategists. I first met him at one of the many “meet and greet” events for new MM […]

FCA logo glass 3 620x430

Tribunal rejects FCA ban for Catalyst director

The FCA has repealed its ban for former Catalyst Investment Group director Andrew Wilkins after a decision by the Upper Tribunal. In August 2013 the regulator sought to ban and fine Wilkins £100,000 over his role in the collapse of Catalyst, which is now in default. Catalyst was censured by the FCA in October 2013 […]


Ian McKenna: Robo-advice could squeeze out fund groups

The news that Aberdeen Asset Management is to acquire Parmenion looks a fascinating transaction for many reasons. To me it appears a very smart move. That an individual asset manager has directly bought a platform is significant in its own right but it is also worth considering the role and the value of Parmenion’s simplified […]


Neil Liversidge: The immorality of FSCS levies

Despite the anguished howls generated by the latest Financial Services Compensation Scheme levy, there is a certain reticence when it comes to questioning the moral legitimacy of the scheme itself. At this point I should make clear my belief that the FSCS should be completely separated from the protection afforded to bank deposits. I refer […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. So, having purchased in 2013 for £131m the remaining 75 per cent of Cofunds it didn’t already own, L&G now wants to be rid of it. Can MM tell us why?

    I’ve never used CoFunds myself, having decided straight off that the chances of them reliably delivering what they were promising at their pre-launch presentations were extremely slim. Since then I’ve read very many more bad reports than good, typically screwing of them things up, taking an age to sort them out and then refusing to pay compensation for all the grief caused by their own failures. I’ve heard more than one tale of intermediaries having recommended CoFunds and then, a year or two down the line, having had to transfer everything to another platform because the CoFunds platform was such an endless succession of headaches. Not an attractive recipe. But then, with L&G involved, hardly surprising.

  2. I have used Cofunds practically from their inception and now as a private individual via R Plan.
    In my view it was L&G who messed them up. Before them once the initial teething was sorted they were great. Srvice droped off a cliff when L&G took over. Via R Plan things are O K.
    So if the numpties at L&G can’t unload it perhaps management buyout can aquire the retail arm for a tenner. I would be surprised if a decent management couldn’t make something decent of it.

Leave a comment