Do you use a Financial Planner

And I have found the fine line also applies to the FP I use. Very careful not to, or be seen to, provide legal or accountancy advice.

 

I am a very cautious investor, probably verging on dumb .

I have an accountant who has a FP licence.

My FP was a lawyer who now specialises in FP.

And I have a lawyer.

But I would rather be dumb and wealthy than smart and poor .

 

I don't think many here who have done well did in isolation.
Most people I know think that... uhm oops that's a song.
Most people here would've had others around them to be inspired by and draw from their experiences on their investing journey.
Also I think FPs may be a lot better now than back in my starting days when they were just comission sales people.

 

Its without saying, this forum a good resource
Also does not necessarily mean you need a FP on your team

 

. So …….Is this advice??????

Starting my share journey

 

For those who are not sure whether they need a FP
Pretty much sums it up nicely

When do you need a financial planner and how to choose one?

 

why go to an accountant for legal advice?

To give financial advice would require an AFSL. Financial advice is advice involving a financial product such as super, shares, insurance etc.No lawyer or accountant give give this unless they are licensed.
Structure is legal advice because it involves the ownership of property, trust law, corporations law etc and no something a planner or an accountant can give - lawfully - unless they are also lawyers.

 

This post is interesting ……..

can an accountant set up a trust?

my accountant organised my trust about 15 years ago, I think its the lawyer that drafts this. But My trust is signed off by my last acct

Not sure about advice, but every acct I dealt with worth their salt was a full bottle on structures

 

I think part of the problem is most people who start out seeking an adviser are expecting someone who will say go buy shares in x y z and you will end up making tons of money.
The adviser is their to guide you and give you a level of understanding with regards to the different asset classes.
Are they there to advise on structure? Not from my experience. Not sure how well versed the average adviser is on structures and tax suitability of such structures.

You have heard from a number of investors on this forum who have many years of experience and some who have also worked with advisers. The common theme for the basic question of what should I invest is fairly simple. An index fund or 2 is all you need. There has been numerous studies and research done that points to the fact that such a strategy would be the most suitable for the average investor.

There are obviously other asset classes outside of equities that you might want advice on. Problem is most advisers seem to only be able to officially advise on equities. I was told something about their license not allowing them to give advice on other asset classes such as unlisted property or mortgage syndicates which I invest in.

After working with advisers for 5 years at a cost of something like $30k my conclusion is this. Had I not engaged an adviser 5 years ago I am not sure how much longer it would have taken me to jump in and invest in equities. At the same time if I had just invested based on the strategy of 2 index funds and invest as much as possible as soon as possible I believe my results to date would be superior compared to the years of active managers and market timing strategies that we attempted.

 

If the accountant advised on terms of the trust, who should take what role, what happens on death etc then they have given legal advice.
If all the did was act as a scribe and inserting names etc without advice then what is the point of using them instead of going to the lawyer direct.

 

Appreciate your feed back on this.

 

Part of the issue is that there are multiple professionals involved. And they'll only do 'their bit'. The lay person couldn't give a rats about the professional 'buckets' - they just want to talk with 'someone' that will help them sort their 'money stuff'.

 

So who has given you advice on structure?
So seems many think a FP will do this? But not so

 

I found this quote from that link interesting:

“… if you feel you’re not achieving your ‘financial potential’, it’s probably a good idea to speak with a financial planner!”​

I was achieving ‘my financial potential’.

What my FP did was reset and raised my ‘financial potential’.

And we achieved that new, higher financial potential, 5 times what I thought was achievable.

IMHO, that’s the value of a (good) FP - not just suggesting investment products but help with the setting and achieving of better outcomes.

 

Don’t get caught up on the word “structure” - you know the answer is that’s legal advice. The thing is for many people there is a need to thrash out a whole lot of options and then put them in place. I have horror stories of FP’s from decades ago and never thought I would be defending them BUT they do have a place. FP’s can help devise a plan - with or without insurance options. Use a lawyer for the legal stuff and an accountant for the tax stuff - simples! For someone who doesn’t need a FP you seem to bespending a lot of time convincing yourself you don’t

 

Money well spent
I think that’s fair enough

You hear good and bad stories, like everything.

 

I started this thread for discussion. I am not opting out.

…. And in turn you are spending time replying …..

Clearly, Many have strong opinions on this, its a forum ……we don’t have to agree, who cares

If anything some of the posts here have been an eye opener for me.

 

Yep, my responses are out of concern for others who may read this thread at sometime in the future and be misled by some of the misguided posts here. Call it balance

 

And if a person has had an unfavourable experience with an FP, it may colour their view of all FPs, justified or not. The Judge ruled against me so all Judges makes poor rulings.

 

That’s good, if all else fails we have the links I posted, covers what FP do.
Now you can sleep at night