Back to all stories

Mortgage financial advisors pushing risky loans

Original source

In the fall of the year 2005 and when the real estate market was going crazy and all kinds of real estate investors were giving speeches and masquerading as advisors, I attended a local seminar about real estate investing.

I already had my rural land property/investment business model developed and most of my current advisors in place. A mortgage broker was speaking about loans for real estate.

These so called mortgage financial advisors were recommending people take interest only loans to fund their real estate purchases because the rates were low and it cash flows easily. There are many problems with this dumb advice.

Here are some:

  • Debt at some point has to be paid back. Anybody who has done any investing and used debt with real estate, stocks, or a business knows this. Delaying indefinitely paying off a debt is foolish.
  • Even if an interest only loan for any type of investment cash flows today, it might not tomorrow, next month, or next year. The investment might quit paying. For example:
  • The tenant lost his/her job. The property flip did not work as the foundation crack was not discovered during the euphoria when the property was bought. Funds (from more debt) were needed to fix the crack when an engineer who looked at the property to buy it discovered it.
ISSUES
Deceptive Practices
Incorrect Advice

Related Horror Stories

The worst thing I did financially was seeing a financial planner

Read full story

Long story short, recently saw a Financial Planner as I was about to make my first home purchase. It was a stressful time and I was looking to consult a professional to make sure I could afford long-term. I'm not financially illiterate but I'm not an expert, especially with things like forecasting how finances can affect my future long-term. In retrospect, I really should have seemed multiple planners but ended up going with the one due to time restrictions in the property search (pre-approval and the like).

This planner wasn't exactly badly reviewed. The process seemed legit, starting off with an SOA (Statement of Advice) being issued and a good amount of questions and direction from me. I wasn't quite sure what this document would entail but basically, it had some basic general advice (skewed a little bit) followed by switching my super to their fund and buying some life insurance through them. I got the piece of paper with this advice and found out that they would cost 11% of my total super to engage for the entire year which is huge. There was more content of disclaimers than actual advice. Probably only 3 pages of actual numbers.

Basically, after a year of engagement, I'd be worse off financially than if I hadn't engaged them at all. I should have read between the lines but this wasn't clear during the engagement phase.

Anyway, I coughed up the amount for the SOA (a month's salary) because I had signed for it, but I feel like they shouldn't have engaged me if I was going to be financially worse off after their services. The percentages weren't made clear until the advice was issued which was basically a glorified fee proposal.Anyway, let this be a warning to you all to really hone in on what you're getting if you do seek it and decide if it's not something you can figure out yourself. It was a waste of time and money for me and can't help but feel I was tricked as I'm not an expert in this field. I've put it down to a hard lesson learnt.

Read more
ISSUES
Deceptive Practices
High Fees

Fee Overload: How I Was Sold a Costly Pension Plan with Hidden High Fees and Poor Performance

Read full story

I went to see one about setting up a private pension because I don't get one through my employer (employed through an offshore company). Got charged about 150 quid for them to go away and "research" some options for me (probably very little research to be done; they already have a standard set of funds that they use through Openwork). For the first year they wanted 35% of my contributions.

The fund that they "found" for me (something Graphene, can't remember the name of it and I'm not at home to check) consisted of several individual funds to apparently lessen the risk of a single fund manager going to shit. In total the funds consisted of about 70% UK equities (why?), had rubbish past performance when compared to a global index tracker and would've cost me well over 2 or 3% per year (can't remember the exact number sorry), plus about 1% per year to the financial advisor for "management" after the initial 35% for the first year.

Read more
ISSUES
High Fees
Incorrect Advice

Most advisors are just monkeys

Read full story

Most are just monkeys 🐒 on a string following a long set of guidelines. What you need is someone who understands math and questions every single guideline. Some of the guidelines don't past the test and end up costing their clients money every year.

This is a very small percentage that can actually do this. In fact my financial advisor is one of the majority monkeys. Occasionally I need to remind him to manage my account my way or he will start managing it like the rest of his clients. But he is a very good and smart person with a good heart.

I wouldn't trust a good percentage of them, find one that gives of the right vibe.

Read more
ISSUES
Incorrect Advice
Read more stories

Share Your Story

Have you had a negative experience with a human financial advisor or other human “financial expert”? Share your story to help others avoid similar issues. Together, we can shed light on the importance of reliable, unbiased financial advice - its been a big motivator for us to build PortfolioPilot.

Shield icon representing anonymity protection
Don't worry, stories are anonymous!
Thank you for adding your story - we'll review for compliance reasons and post it in the next few days!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.