Friday, November 8, 2013

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: How do we get an income from our joint pension and savings?

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
How do we get an income from our joint pension and savings?
Nov 9th 2013, 07:01

We have the cash in various accounts but have little experience in money management

Every week a Guardian Money reader submits a question, and it's up to you to help him or her out – a selection of the best answers will appear in next Saturday's paper.

This week's question

We are a retired couple in our early 60s with a combined pension of £14,500 and savings of £250,000 (mostly inherited) in various low-interest accounts. What's the best way to use this money to create an income? We have thought of buying a flat to rent but have mixed views. We have little experience in money management and would appreciate readers' suggestions.

What are your thoughts?

Have you got a personal finance question you want readers to answer? Email personal.effects@theguardian.com


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Dear Jeremy – your work issues solved

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Dear Jeremy – your work issues solved
Nov 9th 2013, 07:00, by Jeremy Bullmore

Problems at work? Need advice? Our agony uncle – and readers – have the answer

• Need help? Email Jeremy at dear.jeremy@theguardian.com outlining your dilemma

How can I get my medical colleagues to take me seriously?

I am a female doctor working in the community with an all-female team of nurses and a consultant who is my supervisor. I am midway through my training to become a consultant, having graduated more than six years ago; however, I am the youngest in the team by nearly 15 years.

Although I have lived with my partner for six years, my colleagues consistently decline to take my home life seriously as I am unmarried and we don't have children. I am frequently expected to stay late. I've been allocated "on call" over the entire Christmas period as "you don't have a husband or kids to be home for" – never mind that I had planned to spend time with my partner and extended family.

Additionally, the nursing staff repeatedly refer to me as a "student doctor" in front of patients despite knowing that I am fully qualified and have a large caseload of my own. I suspect it is not helped by the fact that I look young for my age. It is demoralising to me and misleading to patients.

How can I make my colleagues take me and my position seriously? I have tried consistently referring to my partner as "my other half" to make whether or not I am married vague, and talking about "grown-up" subjects like my mortgage and nephews, but it hasn't helped.

I feel I can't talk to my supervisor about this as she is one of the worst offenders, and is solely responsible for my evaluation at the end of this job, allowing me to progress in my career. I am in this post until August 2014. How can I – or should I – address this?

Jeremy says

This isn't easy for you and I'm not going to pretend otherwise. Your colleagues' attitude has an almost schooldays feel to it: not exactly bullying, but certainly discrimination. That 15-year age disparity seems to have prompted an entirely unreasonable "us and you" segregation.

It's very unsatisfactory that you feel unable to talk to your supervisor, though I understand why. But there's one topic you must raise with her and that's the custom of the nursing staff, in front of patients, regularly referring to you as a student doctor.

When you bring it up, don't mention the demoralising effect this has on you; concentrate entirely on the implication for patients. As your supervisor must agree, when patients have faith in their medical advisers and the treatment they're given, it's beneficial all round. For patients to be led to believe that you're still a student is not only untrue, but could impair your relationship with them. So you're entirely entitled to ask your supervisor to remind the nursing staff that you're a fully-qualified physician with a full caseload, and that to imply to patients you're still a student is unprofessional.

When making this unarguable point to your supervisor, please do everything you can to keep any sense of personal umbrage out of it. Be both reasoned and reasonable. My hope is that, albeit indirectly, the nature of the request that you're making, and the maturity with which you are making it, will nudge your supervisor into realising that she and the others in your team should begin to see you as more of an equal than they currently do.

Realistically, however, you need to accept that for an individual to escape from unfair preconceptions and cliquishness while remaining in the same work environment can be almost impossible. You often need to begin all over again: with no history, in a new place and with new colleagues. So if you can survive another nine months or so, and keep on the right side of your supervisor, you've at least got that blessed escape to look forward to.

Readers say

• If you want respect, then take steps to earn it. The next time a nurse calls you "the student" in front of a patient, cut across her, smile at the patient and say "that's right, I only qualified six years ago". Then get the nurse on her own and tell her (not ask her) "that the patients deserve to know they are being treated with respect, and an integral part of that is that they are being seen by qualified doctors". PathetLao

Stay-at-home mother needs tips for getting back into workplace

I am a 43-year-old mother of three who hasn't worked for 12 years. I graduated with a 2:1 degree in modern languages 17 years ago, and started, but never completed, a PGCE.

I worked in admin for a local authority and the NHS until my first child was a year old, fully intending to return to work within a few years, but then a couple more children and an economic downturn happened.

I now need to find something to do for my own sanity but don't know where to start. I am aware I will need some retraining. Any suggestions gratefully received.

Jeremy says

If you think about job opportunities in the conventional way, your lack of a sense of direction is entirely understandable. Scanning the websites and reading the Situations Vacant columns, you're bound to wonder why any of those potential employers would want to snap you up in preference to others: people more qualified, with more recent experience, glowing current references and a driving passion for that particular line of work.

Which is why I'm going to suggest that your ideal future employer might well turn out to be you. Half a million people start their own businesses every year in this country. The internet has made it easier than ever. Tap "Starting your own business" into your search engine and you'll find enough free advice and inspiration to keep you occupied for a weekend.

If you have a good friend in much the same situation as you, even better: a partnership provides immense comfort and support. Remember, a successful small business can be very local and very niche; it doesn't have to compete with grown-up companies. Indeed, it's much better if it doesn't. You can even work from home, which gives you more flexibility than most conventional jobs.

Start with activities that you've always enjoyed and been interested in: an old hobby, perhaps, or an old enthusiasm. Even successful small businesses need constant love and attention, so it ought to be about something that gives you satisfaction – not just something to keep you occupied.

Readers say

• What have you been doing for the past 12 years and what would you like to do? I find it hard to believe that you've only done child care – all the stay-at-home mums I know do plenty of volunteering – helping at school, helping with the PTA, helping with the library. Perhaps something you've been doing to "help out" might give you an idea. FrayedKnotweed

• Completing your PGCE and becoming a language teacher is an obvious option. Isn't there a shortage of language teachers? SpursSupporter

For Jeremy's and readers' advice on a work issue, send a brief email to dear.jeremy@theguardian.com. Please note that Jeremy is unable to answer questions of a legal or contractual nature or to reply personally.


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Ted Beales is so ill he can't swallow. But the NHS won't pay for his care

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Ted Beales is so ill he can't swallow. But the NHS won't pay for his care
Nov 9th 2013, 07:01

The son of this once-sprightly pensioner has been forced to battle the NHS over whether his dad qualifies for help he so desperately needs

Until recently my father, Ted Beales, was a gregarious 86-year-old. When he wasn't pruning his roses, he would be at church meetings.

But in May this year he suffered a major stroke that left him unable to swallow, speak or stand. I flew back from my home in Thailand to see him – but rather than spending quality time together I soon found myself embroiled in a fight with the NHS to protect his savings and the family home, a three-bed bungalow in Clacton, Essex.

When I arrived back in the UK, the local healthcare trust wanted a meeting to discuss whether my father, a widower, qualified for "NHS continuing healthcare". This is a little-known scheme where the NHS covers all the costs, including board and accommodation for someone in a care or nursing home. It is a package that is, in the official lingo, arranged and funded solely by the NHS for individuals who are not in hospital who have a "complex medical condition and substantial and ongoing care needs".

But despite making contributions all his working life, and his obvious needs, it turned out the NHS felt my father wasn't ill enough.

When he was moved into a nursing home, bills for £2,000 a month arrived – and the prospect that his savings could be seized became real.

Yet his needs are clear: he cannot swallow, so a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) has been attached to his stomach, through which medicine and nutrients are supplied. His speech is so poor it is impossible to communicate pain or any basic needs. When he was assessed he could only move his left arm and leg (he can move his right leg very slightly now but that actually creates more problems: he was trying to get his one good leg out of bed when I visited last week, so he's at risk of falling). He'd contracted MRSA in hospital. It is hard to tell how much he understands what is going on. He is doubly incontinent. The list goes on.

At the healthcare trust meeting, a senior nurse and social worker went through a checklist of needs. My father scored "serious" or "severe" in most categories but, as the meeting closed, the nurse told me she didn't think he had qualified.

It took a moment to register what this meant.

At first there was a feeling of shock that the health trust was apparently willing to wash its hands of him when he was so blatantly in need of medical help. This feeling was soon replaced by one of determination to fight for his right to receive help from a system he had always assumed would be there when he needed it.

My father lied about his age to join the army – he served with the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders for about seven years and spent time in Palestine on a peacekeeping mission after the second world war ended – and later worked as a council gardener for more than 30 years.

Once the nurse's recommendation had been made, there was a panel meeting with the North East Essex Clinical Commissioning Group, where I presented my case. It listened politely, nodded sympathetically and, a week later, told me that my father had not qualified for continuing healthcare.

I opened the letter while surrounded by removal boxes – the family home was having to be cleared to make way for tenants. After a series of platitudes, the health trust's document said my father's needs were mainly "social and personal". If you saw him, you may consider that's like saying all that Nelson Mandela requires is a cup of tea and a cuddle.

My father, now 87, is in a nursing home in Clacton. An appeal against the decision could take up to a year to be heard. For the time being, much of the £2,000 a month nursing home bill is being paid out of my salary and savings (I'm head of English at an international school in Thailand and a travel writer for Lonely Planet; I don't have any siblings). My father's pension should cover about half, but I've only just been granted power of attorney so I'm waiting for some paperwork to come through before I can access it.

As he had to go into a nursing home, he does receive NHS-funded nursing care – £109.79 a week for 2013/14 – and he has just been given an attendance allowance of £79.15 a week. Meanwhile, the only practical thing left to do is to let others know the potential pitfalls of falling ill under the NHS. To that end, I've set up a Facebook group called Give Ted a Bed to highlight the problem.

With hindsight, there were more things we could have done. When he was well, he could have signed his property over to someone else. But make sure you stay well … get sick within six months and the transfer can be blocked. And if you remain in the house you will have to pay the full market rent.

He could have transferred his savings elsewhere and, again, kept his fingers crossed he remained fit for six months afterwards. He could also have taken out critical illness insurance, but he is a proud man who drove, cycled and swam until his mid-80s, and the thought of monthly payments based on a "what if?" scenario would have seemed pointless.

Now he lies in his room most days and tries to speak. Sometimes you can make out a word or two; usually you can't. While I was trying to explain to him, in simplistic terms, that the NHS didn't think he was ill enough to help, he opened his blue eyes wide, looked straight at me and, I'm pretty sure, mumbled: "Bloody cheek."

• North East Essex Clinical Commissioning Group told us: "We can confirm we fund all cases that meet eligibility for CHC [continuing healthcare] funding. It is a statutory requirement. Excluding children the CCG spends over £14.7m in north-east Essex annually on CHC, with a year on year increase in numbers of cases."


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




Media files:
Mark-and-Ted-Beales-003.jpg (image/jpeg)
Mark-and-Ted-Beales-008.jpg (image/jpeg)
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Lease options – win win … or lose lose?

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Lease options – win win … or lose lose?
Nov 9th 2013, 07:00, by Emma Lunn

Lease options are sold as the answer for those struggling to get a mortgage. But there are big pitfalls

Visit any one of a number of online property investor forums and there's one subject dominating conversations: lease options. The deals are touted as a one-stop solution for struggling homebuyers and "motivated" sellers, but chiefly as a way for property investors to exploit the market and expand their portfolio.

But anyone thinking of getting involved should know that these deals are totally unregulated and that vulnerable homeowners may lose their home and still be responsible for the mortgage. The Financial Conduct Authority warns against lease options, as does the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

Lease options are also known as "rent-to-buy" or "rent-to-own". The idea for struggling homeowners, and people wanting to get on the property ladder, is superficially attractive.

Let's say the owner has to sell because of a divorce, or because their job has relocated to another part of the country, but the market in their area is slow. Let's also say we have someone who is renting but is keen to buy, but can't afford a deposit. You bring the two together with a lease option. The divorcee moves out, and the tenant moves in, and takes over the cost of the mortgage on the property. The new tenant is given the choice (the lease option) to purchase the property, at a pre-set price, during or at the end of a certain period, usually around three to four years.

The tenant – or more likely, an investor who then goes and finds a tenant – pays an "option fee" upfront to set up the deal. This can be as little as £1, which has led to some lease option companies declaring to potential investors they can "buy a house for £1".

A middleman, usually a property investor, sets up the deal and takes a cut of the option fee, rent, and a "back-end" payment when the option is exercised. The contracts are often promoted to buy-to-let investors as a quick way of growing their portfolio, allowing them to control a property without actually investing any money.

Property investor and trainer Mark I'Anson, who claims investors can make £10,000 a month from following his techniques and speaks at £350-a-ticket seminars, describes the deals as "a tool for retail investors to control an asset to produce profit".

"The basic idea is to make a small profit (payment) for managing the property for an agreed length of time by renting it out. The profit is the difference between the outgoing mortgage payment, maintenance plus usual property expenses, and the incoming rent," he says, "A price is agreed for a possible future sale of the property and the potential buyer gains exclusivity of the purchase for an agreed time."

Ben Rogers is another promoter of lease options, who sells "insider secrets" to "buying houses for £1" and describes himself as "one of the UK's niche experts in this way of controlling property for profit". He says: "We normally sell to people who want home ownership and can't afford a mortgage now, or don't qualify for one. Also, self-employed people who can't get a mortgage, or people that need time to qualify for a mortgage or save for a deposit. The beauty of it is that the buyer is fed up paying dead rent to a landlord where they have no control or security about the property. This way they can decorate or put a new bathroom in."

Rogers makes it sound like a win-win situation but one of the main concerns about lease options is that they are completely unregulated, which paves the way for inexperienced or unscrupulous investors to target naïve renter-buyers and desperate sellers.

The major risk to a homeowner entering a lease option is that the renter/investor stops paying the mortgage. Under a lease option, the name on the mortgage is not transferred, and if payments stop, the original homeowner is still liable for the debt. The BBC's 5Live Investigates programme featured one couple who agreed to a lease option, only to face repossession and additional debts of £30,000 after the mortgage was not paid.

Martyn Morgan, solicitor at QualitySolicitors Talbots, says lease options are generally frowned upon by lawyers and the Law Society.

"It is a very dangerous process, particularly for sellers, to grant options to investors to buy a property. The title and mortgage remain in the names of the sellers, so if there is any default on repayment of the mortgage, the seller will be pursued for payment," he says.

Nigel Rowley, managing partner of solicitors Mackrell Turner Garrett, says lease options can work for some people but warns there are unscrupulous companies who market the deals to the desperate and those who see little hope of getting on to – or off – the property ladder.

"Owners accept the promises that tenants will be put in, and that the original mortgage will be paid. But how do they know it will?," he asks. "How do they know whether the property is, in fact, being properly looked after, the mortgage properly paid, tenants in occupation etc. They don't – until it is too late."

It's worth pointing out that lease option advertising tends to be similar to that for quick house sales, an area of the market the Office of Fair Trading is currently investigating. Typically, lease option firms offer "100% of the market value" – but this means today's market value not the market value when the deal completes in X number of years.

The Financial Conduct Authority has lease options on its radar while mortgage experts have warned that most will be against the terms and conditions of most mortgages.

"When they say you can buy a house for £1 with no mortgage and no credit checks it rings alarm bells. It's a large financial commitment and the investor has no personal investment, which makes me very wary," says Stephen Smith, housing director at Legal & General. "Homeowners would need their mortgage lender's permission for this kind of deal and I doubt they'd give it."

Sellers agreeing to lease option deals arguably have more to lose than buyers. If house prices rise they're likely to regret agreeing a price at the time the option was taken out. If prices fall there's a risk the buyer or investor will not exercise their option to buy, and they'll still be stuck with the property.

Buyers, meanwhile, might pay a high rent for years then find, when the time comes to exercise their right to buy, they still can't get a mortgage and they've wasted their money.

I'Anson argues that every party in a lease option should do due diligence on the company they are dealing with. He says a reputable lease option company will have a recognised complaints process, indemnity insurance and a data protection licence.

"A few simple steps will keep everyone a little safer; as an industry, we have to act as if we are regulated and that's the most professional way to be," he says. "If the company you're dealing with doesn't carry all of the above I'd suggest staying away and finding one that does."


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Remember your travel jabs – or risk losing your insurance cover

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Remember your travel jabs – or risk losing your insurance cover
Nov 9th 2013, 07:00, by Jill Papworth

Insurers warn that one in four Britons fail to get jabs before travelling – and may find their policy doesn't pay if they fall ill

Planning a once in a lifetime trip to a far-flung destination, or just seeking some winter sun? Make sure you check with your GP about vaccinations and save hundreds of pounds compared to costly last-minute private clinics.

Travel insurers are warning that too many holidaymakers are failing to get vaccinated – and that an insurance policy won't pay out if they then fall ill.

Almost one in four British holidaymakers does not get vaccinated before going abroad, despite travelling to areas that have life-threatening infectious diseases, according to the NHS.

A spokesman for travel insurer Direct Line said that although it considered claims on a case by case basis, "it is true that it could invalidate your policy if you contract a tropical disease and have not had the required innoculations before travelling".

A claims specialist at insurer More Than added: "We would not cover any expenses incurred as a result of a tropical disease if the policyholder has not had the recommended innoculations and/or taken the recommended medication."

Note that travellers crossing through parts of Africa and South America, perhaps on a gap year, won't be let in to some destinations unless they have a yellow fever vaccination certificate.

The first step before travelling is to call or visit your GP, who will give free, up-to-date information on the vaccinations required and check your records to see if your UK jabs are up to date. Ideally, check with your GP eight weeks before travelling, as some vaccinations take that long for the whole course of doses to be given. But if you decide to travel at the last minute, still take advice – even one jab from a course will give you more protection than none.

Free advice is also available at NHS website fitfortravel.nhs.uk, where there are details of immunisations needed for specific countries and up-to-date malaria maps. Also look at the National Travel Health Network and Centre website at nathnac.org; and netdoctor.co.uk.

Your GP or practice nurse can give you a booster to your UK jabs if you need one and may also be able to give you travel jabs. It is up to individual GP services whether to offer travel jabs – some may refer you to a specialist travel clinic.

The good news is you may not have to pay for any of the innoculations. Vaccinations against polio (given as a tetanus, diphtheria and polio booster), typhoid, cholera and the first dose of hepatitis A are all free. Many GPs also do not charge for the second (booster) dose of hepatitis A or the combined hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccine.

For other vaccinations, such as meningococcal meningitis, hepatitis B, yellow fever, rabies, tuberculosis, Japanese encephalitis and tick-borne encephalitis, the NHS says you're likely to have to pay but adds that GPs can choose not to charge you.

We mystery-shopped one GP surgery, and found that we would be charged £40 for rabies, £55 for Yellow Fever and £85-90 for Japanese encephalitis, but all other innoculations were offered free.

You can get travel vaccinations (and malaria tablets) at private clinics, some of which offer walk-in services, which may appeal if you do not want to wait for GP appointments.

We compared costs for travel vaccinations at four private clinics: the UK Travel Vaccination Service travelvaccination.co.uk, which has clinics in London and the home counties, West Yorkshire and the West Midlands; Masta masta-travel-health.com which has 51 clinics around the country; Nomad Travel nomadtravel.co.uk with health clinics in London, Bristol, Cardiff, Manchester and Bishops Stortford; and Trailfinders' walk-in London clinic trailfinders.com, and found that prices varied significantly.


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Valet parking: hand over your keys … and your car insurance can go too

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Valet parking: hand over your keys … and your car insurance can go too
Nov 9th 2013, 07:00, by Patrick Collinson

Almost half of motorists are not covered for damage while their car is in valet marking, research shows

Do you hand over your keys to a valet parking service at the airport before flying off on holiday? You could be left with a large bill: research by comparison site Gocompare.com found that half of all insurance policies do not cover damage to a vehicle while it is in the control of valet parking.

Gocompare.com reviewed 233 comprehensive car insurance policies and found that valet parking was excluded by 49% of policies. Scott Kelly, Gocompare's head of car insurance, said: "Valet parking, once the preserve of Hollywood movies, is becoming a popular option in the UK with many airports, major hotels and entertainment venues now offering 'meet and greet' services. Valet parking is a convenient way to park your car, especially at airports where it will save you having to drag heavy luggage on to a car park shuttle bus, but you need to consider the implications for your car insurance."

Some valet parking companies claim drivers are covered by their own insurance. But Gocompare said the terms and conditions offer little peace of mind. "Generally operators offer very limited cover for damage to your car, which you will need to spot and report to them on collection, and possessions left in your car are generally excluded."

Meet and greet parking services generally cost little more than the price of 10 days in a long-stay car park, but although many people are happy with the service, it is a business plagued with horror stories.

This summer, BBC1's Your Money, Their Tricks programme tested six different services at three major airports. Each car was fitted with a tracking device which told the programme's investigators whether it actually went to the car park that was promised and, crucially, whether it stayed there.

At Heathrow, the service was precisely as advertised. But at Gatwick, the tracking device found that the car, although initially taken to a secure car park, was 24 hours later driven to a residential address in Crawley – which the programme makers said appeared to be the home of the company's employee. Later, it was returned to the car park.

The other car in Gatwick, and the two in Luton, were taken to compounds that the programme makers alleged were not secure sites monitored by CCTV.


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com: Terry Smith delivers 17% – and leaves other investment funds on the ropes

Personal finance and money news, analysis and comment | theguardian.com
Latest news and features from theguardian.com, the world's leading liberal voice 
Terry Smith delivers 17% – and leaves other investment funds on the ropes
Nov 9th 2013, 07:00, by Patrick Collinson

Terry Smith launched Fundsmith Equity promising easy investing for all. Three years on, we look at how he has performed

Three years ago maverick City multi-millionaire Terry Smith launched an investment fund promising easy, cheap and profitable investing for all. The boxing-mad son of a London bus driver said he would give the "fat and complacent" fund management industry a bloody nose. Three years on, he has amassed £1.5bn in the fund from more than 9,000 small (and some large) investors – and has managed to keep his promise.

An investor who put £1,000 into the fund, called Fundsmith Equity, when it opened in November 2010 will have seen it grow to £1,612 on its third birthday – a gain equal to 17.3% a year. That compares to the 7-8% a year earned by the average fund and puts Terry Smith in fourth place out of 244 in the "global" sector, where the underlying cash is invested in a range of shares from across the world.

His secret? Run a portfolio of just 20-25 stocks (the typical fund has 60 or more), invest for the long term (rival funds buy and sell their holdings on average every seven months, incurring high dealing costs) and focus on large, well-established companies which make their money through small, repeat, predicable everyday events.

"We do not seek to find tomorrow's winners – rather, to invest in companies that have already won such as Colgate, Unilever and Domino's Pizza which are already in dominant positions in their respective sectors. We are encouraged that the average company in our portfolio was established in 1901 and survived two world wars and the Great Depression," says Smith.

Keeping fees down is crucial, he says. "I launched Fundsmith three years ago because I believed the fund management industry was broken. It is still broken. Investors continue to suffer from punitive fee structures, over-complexity, overtrading, fund proliferation, closet indexing and over-diversification."

Too often, he says, investors believe that the standard 1.5% annual management charge is all they are paying but, in reality, they also have to pay for dealing and research costs, which, over time, can seriously eat into their returns. He says his fund pays commission to stock dealers of only 0.04% – and that, in any case, he doesn't trade in and out of shares very often.

"We seek to minimise portfolio turnover costs by only ever investing in good companies that we would be happy to own indefinitely."

His most profitable investment has been Domino's Pizza, which in November 2010 was trading at $15.15 a share, but is now above $68 – and is still good value, reckons Smith. Yes, anyone can make a pizza, he says, but no one matches Domino's for delivery. Indeed, in June the firm tested a drone, dubbed the "DomiCopter," to deliver to a customer's door by air.

Most of his major holdings are familiar household names, such as Microsoft, Reckitt Benckiser (makers of Harpic, Cillit Bang and Durex, among others) and Dr Pepper Snapple Group. But two of his other big holdings – Stryker and Becton Dickinson – will be more familiar to doctors and nurses. Stryker, based in Kalamazoo in Michigan, is the world's biggest maker of replacement joints for hips and knees, while Becton Dickinson, based in New Jersey, makes more needles and syringes than anyone else.

Interestingly, two of the funds that have done better than Smith over the past three years have also been big investors in medical equipment, benefitting from an ageing population and new demand from emerging markets.

Was this a lucky call by Smith, which won't be repeated? Smith points out that medical equipment makes up around 18% of the fund, while the "consumer staples" stocks, such as Reckitt Benckiser, make up 45%. As important has been his decision to shun large parts of the stock market, including banks, insurance, property, housebuilders, oil, mining and resources.

Mining and resources have been about the worst place for investors in the past three years, and Smith says that even after hefty falls, the stocks are too risky to buy. "We're not into global resources. My car can't tell one petrol from another. There's no brand value. We also want to buy companies that can last for ever; every resource company has issues about depletion."

The books of the banks are still difficult to read, he says, and that comes from someone whose ability to see through a set of accounts is legendary. The same goes for insurance companies "whose accounts are almost the definition of opaque", he adds.

Will investors continue to reap returns of 17% a year? Smith says his portfolio of companies is in good shape, but he does not share the recent optimism about an economic turnaround in the UK or even the US, and reckons China is the biggest debt bubble in world economic history.

"I'm a pessimist on the economic outlook. I closely follow 75 worldwide companies, and another 175 in the next layer down. The vast majority of these are currently showing revenue growth that is significantly slower in the last six months than in the same period a year earlier. Things are getting worse more than they are getting better. I don't think there's actually a recovery. Statistics, such as purchasing managers indexes, have been somewhat bent out of shape, and are no longer particularly meaningful."

He points to a statement last week by the boss of Kraft Foods (a stock he does not own), who warned that the only place where sales were rising was in America's equivalent of Poundland (called Dollar stores); that people are falling out of the workforce; and that many US consumers have "minimal ability to buy more than what they need for a given week or sometimes a given day". The economic and financial crisis remains far from over.


theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions