View more on these topics

Hargreaves negotiates on platform charges in bid to retain assets

Hargreaves Lansdown is offering to negotiate wrapper fees with clients in an attempt to retain assets on the platform.

Anecdotal reports from consumers suggest Hargreaves is willing to negotiate fees down and in some cases cap the cost of holding assets on the Vantage platform.

One consumer posting on Moneysavingexpert forum says the platform offered to cap fees at £500 in order to prevent the business being lost to a rival direct platform.

Hargreaves says it may make ‘exceptional arrangements’ for some clients and refused to deny it was offering discounts on headline custody fees.

A spokesman says: “Our pricing tariff is clearly stated and is designed to be fair, competitive and sustainable. It is not our standard approach to have individual arrangements – with 577,000 clients this would simply be unworkable.

“That said, from time to time exceptional arrangements may be appropriate.”

The firm adds charges may be negotiable “where clients put forward some other strong case for an individual arrangement.”

The Platforum head of direct Jeremy Fawcett says: “I suspect recent publicity around pricing will have led to more people thinking about moving but it is probably only worth negotiating with clients if they are particularly valuable or there are lots of them.”

Hargreaves revealed its unbundled pricing structure last month and was forced to defend the introduction of exit fees and re-registration charges.

It subsequently U-turned on its decision to apply additional charges for holding investment trusts. 

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Even so why would anyone still want to pay HL £500 pa when D2C can be found for far less ? I would have thought that on going charges for a basic carrier bag service should be no more than £100 pa.

    I can see why platform providers want to charge as much as they can but not why investors might be willing to pay. Presumably transparency if presented in a complex way is still not transparent.

Leave a comment