AVOID "Knowledge First Financial (KFF)" for RESP - A legal SCAM | Page 2 | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
AVOID "Knowledge First Financial (KFF)" for RESP - A legal SCAM
July 6, 2020
10:44 am
AltaRed
BC Interior
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2884
Member Since:
October 27, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I like Doug's thought process here on fiduciary standards plus an exempt category. Bravo!

July 6, 2020
11:17 am
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3922
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree, it sure is a major step up from the "sometimes when I sign on the dotted line I can hold you to it but other times when I sign on the dotted line it can be disregarded" approach. There remains responsibility on both sides is the key.

July 6, 2020
11:24 pm
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 9245
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree that a fiduciary standard would be ideal, but of course it would have to be enforced, and that does involve regulation; otherwise, I can't see tht it would matter. I considered it earlier but didn't think it would get support here because it involves a much higher level than I had imagined would be acceptable. Perhaps acceptance depends on who proposes it.

But if this means they must pass the CFA, then there is not a snowball's chance in Hades of it becoming a reality. Those folks really have to work hard for their designation and only work with high net worth individuals (if they work with individuals at all).

At the moment we can't even count on bank employees to exercise fiduciary responsibility as they put pressure on their employees to sell.

It would be great if we could count on some kind of natural attrition due to stricter standards. But let's remember that the reason standards and regulations exist at all is because customers were mistreated.
For more information on this, OP might want to look at The professional financial advisor: putting transparency and integrity first by De Goey, John J. DeGoey has been very involved in advocating for increased fiduciary responsibility on the part of financial industry and is very informative.. Look for the most recent edition.

July 7, 2020
1:58 pm
Doug
British Columbia, Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 4230
Member Since:
December 12, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Loonie said
I agree that a fiduciary standard would be ideal, but of course it would have to be enforced, and that does involve regulation; otherwise, I can't see that it would matter. I considered it earlier but didn't think it would get support here because it involves a much higher level than I had imagined would be acceptable. Perhaps acceptance depends on who proposes it.

Loonie, I took the liberty of correcting your typo in the third instance of the word that in the above-quoted passage, in case you wanted to correct the original. sf-cool

It wouldn't take much to enforce this actually; it'd just be a simple rule change to the applicable National Instrument(s) that specify what the proficiency requirements are and/or to repealing the applicable National Instrument(s) dealing with dealing representatives.

But if this means they must pass the CFA, then there is not a snowball's chance in Hades of it becoming a reality. Those folks really have to work hard for their designation and only work with high net worth individuals (if they work with individuals at all).

There would be incredible resistance to this change, from the investment distribution and banking industries. The amount of lobbying done by industry lobby groups would probably increase ten-fold (or more) if this were proposed. Could be a short term boon for the Ottawa-area restaurants, to be sure!

To be clear, though, one wouldn't need to be a CFA; they could be a CIM and still be licensed as an advising representative held to a fiduciary standard. Robo-advisors are licensed as advising representatives, so they're held to the same standard and don't strictly deal with ultra high-net worth individuals.

At the moment we can't even count on bank employees to exercise fiduciary responsibility as they put pressure on their employees to sell.

This is true. I still regret referring a client to bank investment representative to discuss transferring out the commuted value of the client's defined benefit pension plan, and this representative was little more than a licensed mutual fund sales representative. Nevermind the conflicts that come in to play when bank staff are advising on whether or not to sign a bank power of attorney form.

It would be great if we could count on some kind of natural attrition due to stricter standards. But let's remember that the reason standards and regulations exist at all is because customers were mistreated.

Absolutely.

Cheers,
Doug

July 7, 2020
2:51 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AltaRed said
It is a broader question about commissions and the livelihood it gives sales folk. Should it be outlawed period across the financial industry? Life insurance salespeople? Annuity salespeople? Mutual funds? RESP products?

The concept used to be that these financial products were too complicated for the average investor to understand and thus an advisor...err salesperson was necessary to explain suitability if product and they needed to be paid.

Unfortunately, too many salespeople are a slimy bunch and simply push product, sometimes misrepresenting it. Wise investors wised up and started buying term life insurance online bypassing sales folk, and started buying no fee bank mutual funds.

Despite all this, the commission model still exists for many products and some investors still need or want guidance. How does one accommodate that need?  

Commission is a one-time payment. In this sales model, the commission is on every single unit you purchase during the 18 years! That's what I am against. I didn't say to make commission illegal. I actually pointed out it can be up to a specific number / percentage but nothing more and only once.

July 7, 2020
4:02 pm
AltaRed
BC Interior
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2884
Member Since:
October 27, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I know nothing about KFF but CST's group plan has a one time commission per unit to start. The monthly or annual contributions per unit attract no further commission.

However if one wanted to buy additional units in the future, those would attract commission again and THAT is egregious. What I said upthread is that future purchases of additional units should attract no further commission.

Until the regulators decide to impose more transparency and responsibility to the client, if they ever do, it will always be 'buyer beware'. No different than anyone walking into an auto dealership and simply taking the quoted price. Most people do more research planning a vacation, buying a flat screen and doing internet homework on an auto purchase than they do financial products.

July 7, 2020
4:03 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Loonie said
Of course, government can and should put these characters out of business. But right now is not a good time to press for it because they are all focused on Covid and little else.

I'm not sure if it is a provincial or federal matter. You could make an appointment with both your MP and MLA. Quebec, in particular, is very strong on consumer protection, if that's any help. They should at least be able to advise you on where to put the pressure. You can also approach Opposition critics for Finance. Sometimes a private members' bill can succeed, if they are interested, where the issue is so obviously in need of being addressed. Political parties all have lists of priorities and they won't necessarily take on every issue that they could. I would also try to get some media attention. Build up a consumer group that can complain jointly and share experiences.

It could take a while to get legislation passed, but it's worth pursuing. You can post on media such as this but it will only get to those who are prudent. The victims will be just like you were.  

Some really great points here. I will wait for this Covid era to go away then start by the media and my MP. Although, apparently this act is already illegal in QC but guess nobody cares!

"Indeed, section 1.1 (7) of Regulation No. 15 Respecting Conditions Precedent to Acceptance of Scholarship or Education Plan Prospectuses, c. V-1.1, r. 44, provides that:

“The fees charged, including the commissions of the distributor and its salesmen, must not exceed $200 per plan. The first $100 paid under the plan may be applied against this fee and the balance may be deducted at a maximum rate of 50% of each of the further contributions”.

July 7, 2020
4:04 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AltaRed said
I know nothing about KFF but CST's group plan has a one time commission per unit to start. The monthly or annual contributions per unit attract no further commission.

However if one wanted to buy additional units in the future, those would attract commission again and THAT is egregious. What I said upthread is that future purchases of additional units should attract no further commission.

Until the regulators decide to impose more transparency and responsibility to the client, if they ever do, it will always be 'buyer beware'. No different than anyone walking into an auto dealership and simply taking the quoted price. Most people do more research planning a vacation, buying a flat screen and doing internet homework on an auto purchase than they do financial products.  

With KFF, every unit purchase cost $100 past, present, future 🙂

July 7, 2020
4:14 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bill said
I agree, it sure is a major step up from the "sometimes when I sign on the dotted line I can hold you to it but other times when I sign on the dotted line it can be disregarded" approach. There remains responsibility on both sides is the key.  

I totally agree it is the responsibility of both sides. I didn't blame them but blamed myself and said it clearly without being shy about it. I say when I make good / bad decisions. However, I found the target of these people are the vulnerable. Yes, I can blame the drug addicts and let them die (After all it was their call to become addicted) but we have supervised injection sites to protect them from themselves and that's exactly why there are Antiviruses running on almost every system in the world so in case people go and click that one infected attachment, they don't offer the hacker their whole system.
I can keep bringing up examples but rules are not made just because people don't know. They are made because some fall on the wrong side of the equation. Why do you think it is illegal to purchase or advertise sexual services and illegal to live on the material benefits from sex work. Although it is legal to sell sexual services? Basically legal to get money but illegal to give money! It is because some people are considered victims by law and the law / government should protect those with less power, money, knowledge.

That's my argument. I made a mistake. I don't want others to make the same mistake! Is that a bad / unaccepted / unnecessary approach from your point of view? I can learn from your view as it will help me prepare the case and answers.

July 8, 2020
1:18 am
Loonie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 9245
Member Since:
October 21, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

That's really interesting that there is a rule in Quebec that is relevant. Next question would be whether it is enforced and what is the mechanism and does one have any recourse.
If it has any teeth, might provide model for other provinces. It is at least instructive.

July 8, 2020
5:49 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yes, so I found the action lawsuit against them and signed up for it. I am going to wait till courts get back to normal and call the law firm handling it.

Will be very interesting to see how they can defend themselves in the court of law! Money suckers!

I am also going to transfer all KFF to QuestWealth RESP account next month.

August 5, 2020
8:02 am
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Just a quick update. I initiated a transfer from the legal thieves (KFF) to QuestWealth and here is the reply I got. Do you see the $135+tax fee? At least I can recover this by QuestWealth. Waiting for the letter to see what they mean by "retained". I assume the money grabbers might have more hidden fees. Just WOW!

Good afternoon,

Please note your transfer out documents were received and will be processed within 45 business days of receipt. Within this time, you will be receiving breakdown letters disclosing the amounts to be transferred/retained as well as the transfer fee of $135+tax.

August 5, 2020
8:34 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 6768
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The transfer fee is not that unusual, unfortunately.

Scotia iTRADE, for example, now charges $150 for a registered account transfer out, full or partial. If one just wants to close and de-register the registered account to a cash account, it would be $125.

I suspect "retained" amounts would include interest earned. Group RESP's tend to retain any investment earnings and allocate them to the remaining participants when a participant leaves "early".

The risk in those kind of RESP's was actually not the government bonds the money was invested in. It was what happens should the parents be unable to keep up the monthly purchases, the parents decide to leave early, or the child wasn't going eligible post secondary training.

August 5, 2020
8:51 am
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yes but with them charging the stupidly high fees one would think there is no transfer out fees. I can't even find a reference to the fees on their web site. I also went through the contract and there is no transfer out information. I will call them for a reference to this fee.

As I mentioned in my post, KFF cancelled the contributing of the extra "allocations" upon departures. The interest earned are only the normal interests gained through market (mostly Bonds in this case) gain so I will be furious if they really do that.

Here is what they say: "Please note that your plan is now a Family Single Student Plan. Family Group Plan was transferred to a Family Single Student Plan in January 1, 2020. As a result of the transfer, the attrition value was transferred to your Family Single Student Plan. The Family Single Student Plan is designed to create flexibility in withdrawing the funds. You can request to withdraw the funds at once or installments and there is no deadline to mature the plan. "

And I went through the break down of the funds but don't see any extra contribution (Aka attrition value) when comparing 2019 and 2020. Even if there is any, it might be less than $10.

For me, I only purchased once and luckily were smart enough to not subscribe to any monthly payment for life. What a disaster it would have been.

Can't wait to dump KFF!

August 5, 2020
9:51 am
AltaRed
BC Interior
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2884
Member Since:
October 27, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree transfer out fees are common. Every brokerage account from every provider I know of charges upwards of $150 plus tax for transfer outs. The RESP I have at BMO Investorline would have that charge, but in most cases, the receiving institution will pick that up for getting the business.

August 5, 2020
2:20 pm
Save2Retire@55
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 845
Member Since:
January 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The complaint wasn't about the transfer out initially though and FYI WealthSimple doesn't charge any transfer out. Peoples Trust doesn't charge as well. Tangerine charges $50. Anyway ... this company and any similar ones are pure evil!

November 5, 2020
10:28 am
trhaynes
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 12
Member Since:
November 5, 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Unfortunately, I signed up with KFF years ago and tied into regular contributions. I see now that I would do better running it myself.

I am not entirely sure of the math behind why they are a legal scam, aside from the general concept that they charge high fees and their return is not much better than standard GIC rates. I believe I initially signed with them because I didn't trust myself to not lose principal in my own investing.

What would I need to do to transfer out? Sign up with RESPs somewhere else and let the new firm handle all the transfer paperwork? Where would I transfer to that is low fee and can do automated contributions?

Thank you everybody!

November 5, 2020
11:46 am
AltaRed
BC Interior
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2884
Member Since:
October 27, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Normally, the process is to establish an RESP account with a financial institution and additionally fill out the paperwork to have them initiate the transfer of the RESP from the old institution.

I am not overly familiar with types of RESP account but I believe the new one would have to be the same, e.g. individual or family, as the old one AND with the same sponsor. You also need to decide what kinds of investments you are going to want to own. Will it include stocks? bonds? a mix of GICs from various providers? A family of mutual funds? A single holding of say MAW104 balanced mutual fund, or an Asset Allocation ETF like VBAL from Vanguard?

Or products from a single provider like BMO in which case their Asset Management advisors at the bank can recommend a suite of offerings?

It wouldn't surprise me that the vast majority of RESP providers would have transfer out fees. After all, RESP account administration is complex (contributions, CESG, earnings) and those details would have to be passed on to the new RESP provider. Those that don't have such transfer out fees probably only deal in GICs and HISAs, which is a tough way to grow an RESP account with returns being as poor as they are.

I'd suggest you need to provide the audience here with some characterization of what the RESP account would hold, in order for the audience to be able to give you some examples that might fit your needs, e.g. automated contributions. The only RESP account I am sponsor of is at a discount brokerage BMO IL and I fund it once a year in January.

November 5, 2020
12:12 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2875
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Save2Retire@55 said
Hello All,

Many years ago I was fool enough to be scammed by KFF agents who came with their beautiful smiles to my home. As a new parent they knew how to target people. Also they were referred by a friend which created a trust.

What they do is to make you sign papers to keep paying monthly or yearly for your child(ren) in return of buying Units. These units are like shares of any Mutual Fund, ETF, or Stocks. The difference? They deduct a hefty $100 per unit. Example I paid $5000 in 2014 and got about 9 units. They took more than $900 right away.

Gladly I didn't sign for any yearly thing and instead opted in for just the one payment 6 years ago.

For my other child, I paid only $1000 as they were selling to me the price of each unit will go higher and it is always best to buy as soon as the child is born, etc. So I got 2.27 units which they deducted more than $220 for it.
As you see the deduction counts for 22% of the investment. This is a HUGE loss.

They were also advertising "Attrition Value" and "Supplement Amount" which are basically the distribution of the units' from those who cancelled their plans. This was one of their main selling point telling me that I will get a huge lump sum at the end as many people cancel early yearly. This is another HUGE LIE and SCAM. The whole thing was about $9 per unit extra so I'd have received an extra $100 or so for my $6000 investments after 18 years!

IMPORTANT: They cancelled this so called supplement value so no extra money.

Their return has been averaging close to 3% a year. I could have bought a 5 years GIC with Meridian for %3.75 or even do better buying ETFs on my own or use Robo advisors and keep investing paying 0.25% management fee rather than losing 22% (Yes that's about 100 times more). Plus you get monthly or quarterly dividends payout when purchasing ETFs which is NOT the case with KFF.

Advantage: NONE
Disadvantage: Lose 22% of your investment up front. Low yearly return. No dividends or lump sum payments.

Bottom Line: I regret this $1200 loss as a principle and if I could I would be an advocate to educate new parents avoiding this place or any other similar money management companies. It took 5 years of income to recover the unit fees they deducted.sf-yell  

Thats like 20% fee upfront and yet people agreed ?!?!
The best hedge fund manager in the world charges 2% fee on asset and only 20% IF they make a profit for you. And thats 20% of the profit NOT the principal !!

November 5, 2020
12:17 pm
Bill
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 3922
Member Since:
September 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Just wondering, is it a given that an FI needs to allow RESP account transfers out? Or are they allowed to lock you in?

No permission to create posts

Please write your comments in the forum.