stay away from WFG
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4201 Jul 9, 2010
al from the n0rth wrote:
<quoted text>
This is very funny because I catch you in lies all the time. You have no credibility “wfg is a scam” or can I call you “SLake”?!!
So you are disputing all the lawsuits? You are also discrediting MFDA, the governing body of all mutual funds in Canada?

Keep sticking your head in your ass because that's where you belong!
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4202 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text> You are a loser and you were hired off the street.
Let's be clear. Here is the DIFFERENCE between you and I:

I "applied" for my position at the financial company with my professional resume and cover letter explaining my post-secondary education with transcripts, professional certifications, and related work experiences. Then I had at least two rounds of interviews and had EVERYTHING verified to ensure that they are CORRECT.

You just went to WFG from the street because some stupid bone-head needs a recruit. You were dumb enough to go to a couple of meetings and hired on the spot. All the while you didn't even know you are joining nothing more than a company based on MLM. Already you are brainwashed into "no family left behind".

See the differences? You were hired OFF THE STREET and you are ALWAYS THE LOSER!

The fact that you are still in DENIAL make you even more STUPID and IGNORANT!
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4203 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>you guys are a bunch of losers...recruiting IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO EARN HIGHER COMMISSION. There is more to it than just recruiting. Recruiting alone will not make you a QMD. You could recruit 100's of people and still not be a QMD, or even an MD. BTW...pyramids are illegal. Learn what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
Not true, the loser at the meeting told me that the number of recruits will move you up the ladder to senior associate, MD and so on. The commissions you earn will be more.

Pyramids are illegal but that's what an MLM is. Those financial products may be legit but they are not all suitable to your so-called clients. But you won't know better because they are complicated and you need the high commissions.

By the way, why is it that we "nay-sayers" provided all the WFG documents on this forum and losers like you keep denying them?

Everyone knows you are stupid, so learn some real financial education rather than the "Rule of 72" and shut your mouth!
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4204 Jul 9, 2010
PayingAttn wrote:
Wow, the misinformation on this forum is astounding.
I went back last Saturday, and as it turns out. the $125 fee, as well as the exam fee that is paid to the licensing arm of the province (not WFG) is REFUNDED by WFG if reps complete their training in 30 days. The reason for the incentive is to motivate people to finish training and get licensed, which of course increases their likelihood of being successful.
There is no payment for recruiting, BUT the more ACTIVE reps one has under them, the higher their commission is, so there IS an incentive to recruit, but recruitment ALONE nets nothing. The person you recruit must be successful in their own right, not just a warm body.
I still haven't signed up, but I haven't seen any red flags from this particular office. Not to say there aren't issues with some of the WFG reps and offices, but so far, the additional people I met when I sat in on a training class (without signing up) seem to know what they are talking about, and as I said before, I know enough about investments from my own finances to know if they are blowing smoke up my @#$; however, I am not so knowledgeable about insurance over and above the insurance I've had over the years.
Good luck to you all with the bickering going on in this thread, I can't devote as much time to it as you all have. I am leaning towards signing up and will likely do so this week. I think after visiting their office three times and scouring the Internet, I see that the problem with WFG lies with its lack of control over independent contractors, so a switch to employee/employer relationships would fix that... and the second problem is unethical or improperly trained reps.
I'm not unethical, and I will have proper training, so I can't foresee a problem with this particular office. I am only looking at this as a means for temporary income, and later, part time income. Nobody in that office is loaded or filthy rich, they are just working 20-30 hours per week on their own schedule while making what everybody else makes in a 40 hour week.
Congratualations! Let's hope your brain cells will not be WFG-pickled to the point of your new friends "Doorknob" and "Mike the Dork".
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4205 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>Talk about grasping at straws!! If 2 people cook you the same meal are the always going to taste the exact same? Is it not possible for one person to be a better cook than the other. Maybe one person was at one time a chef or a cook with years of experience. Maybe neither have experience but one just has a nack for cooking. Who knows the reasons...there could be hundreds. Do you have any more stupid questions?
Now can you tell that you are STUPID?

So you are saying that 2 different MacDonald's restaurants in the world will cook differently for a Big-Mac? Are you grasping at straws???

How about a can of Campbell's tomato soup will be different if I buy it at an A&P than at a Fortino's or a Loblaw's?

Okay, if I want to buy a Honda Civic, you are telling me that only one dealership in the entire world will have what I wanted?

Oh, I got this one! What about the acutely financially challenged and severe low IQ levels of all WFG's independent contractors? Will it be different from "Mike the dork" at one Ontario branch from "Doorknob" from the other one?

DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE STUPID QUESTIONS?
Mike B

Sudbury, Canada

#4206 Jul 9, 2010
WFG is a scam wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true, the loser at the meeting told me that the number of recruits will move you up the ladder to senior associate, MD and so on. The commissions you earn will be more.
Pyramids are illegal but that's what an MLM is. Those financial products may be legit but they are not all suitable to your so-called clients. But you won't know better because they are complicated and you need the high commissions.
By the way, why is it that we "nay-sayers" provided all the WFG documents on this forum and losers like you keep denying them?
Everyone knows you are stupid, so learn some real financial education rather than the "Rule of 72" and shut your mouth!
Wrong again...recruiting alone will NEVER make you an MD.
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4207 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>McDonalds is a franchise and owners have rules they MUST adhere to. They can't change or do ANYTHING, PERIOD! WFG is different. It is TRULEY YOUR OWN BUSINESS. There is compliance and certain rules that must be followed, but as far as training goes...each office it on it's own. Each office has to book sessions with product providers and each office is responsible for training their people on the system and growing their business hence my example. Some people are naturally better trainers and motivators than others. Some people are more ethical than others. Some people are just more financially savvy than others. Some people are better builders than others. Do I have to continue for your peanut brain to be able to grasp this?
"Truly" YOUR OWN BUSINESS? Are you on WFG crack?

Do you even know what compliance rules are? They are governed by the authorities, in your case, the MFDA and the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO). The member firms must adhered to these rules at ALL TIMES in ALL BRANCHES. No exceptions!

But did Purisma Dy's case by MFDA was a serious lapse or no compliance at all when her forged criminal record wasn't even verified by WFG before she got her licenses? Listen you "peanut" brain, a fail compliance by one office means a fail compliance to an entire company. Just as people turning away from WFG morons like you because of all those lawsuits and bad publicities.

Because you are dumb enough to sign that WFG's "Indepedent Contractor's" agreement without reading it, why don't you go back and see if you really have your "own business"? Compared with other financial advisors, you have no freedom. You can't even take your business and clients legally with you if you want to leave WFG, where brokers from Scotia Mcleod can easily move to TD Waterhouse or CIBC and others if they so choose at a moment notice.

Altogether now, "Mike B needs a cracker! Mike B needs a cracker!"
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4208 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>When I die I can leave my residual income to my kids...If I want I can sell my code back to WFG for a price based on what my business is worth...if it wasn't MINE I wouldn't be able to do these things. I have no boss. I don't have to answer to ANYONE...not even my upline. I can come and go as I please. I can sell any product I am licensed to sell. My official title is whatever I want to call myself.
Let's dissect your statement, shall we?

A. "When I die I can leave my residual income to my kids..."

- Your kids will be so glad that they inherit your "residual income" - mostly in red with we call "debt". I am sure they will say, "Daddy, you F-ed it up again!"

B. "If I want I can sell my code back to WFG for a price based on what my business is worth..."

- No, WFG will only pay what they think your business is worth ACCORDING TO THEM. You have NO SAY in that matter. There were past WFG independent contractor that passed away and their next-of-kins didn't even receive a cent from WFG. Go back to your agreement and read again!

C. "if it wasn't MINE I wouldn't be able to do these things."

- Your business is really NOT YOURS. You wouldn't be able to do ANYTHING!

D. "I have no boss. I don't have to answer to ANYONE...not even my upline. I can come and go as I please. I can sell any product I am licensed to sell."

- Your boss IS your up-line, precisely the person "ON THE TOP"! But you won't say "NO" to WFG's conventions do you? You won't say "NO" to selling unsuitable products because WFG's partners give you "Free Sandwiches and Pop" and you can earn high commissions without even knowing what they are, do you?

E. "My official title is whatever I want to call myself."

- You are an insurance salesman, get it right! Dorkie!! You stick your head in your ass just like everyone from WFG!
WFG is a scam

Calgary, Canada

#4209 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong again...recruiting alone will NEVER make you an MD.
Why don't you call Calgary's office in the NE? They are in your WFG's website. Speak to someone named "Chad" and he will explain everything according to WFG.
H Landor

Calgary, Canada

#4210 Jul 9, 2010
Mike B wrote:
<quoted text>It's a good thing we don't know each other and can't put our money where our mouths are. YOU CAN SELL YOUR CODE BACK TO THE COMPANY!! Moron!
Scam Alert wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll take you up on this bet!!!
I took the liberty of calling The Ontario Securities Commission,
http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/contactus_index.h...
The MFDA,
http://www.mfda.ca/contacts/contactus.html
and IIROC.
http://www.iiroc.ca/English/About/Contacts/Pa...
All these regulatory bodies have said you can not sell your code. As a matter of fact on of the individuals I talked to suggested I go and file an "investigation" into your claims and the company!!!
Anyways, I have a plane to catch, so I'll settle this bet when I get back from the Calgary Stampede.
I'd be willing to "Put my money where my mouth is"!!! I'll call the Alberta Securities Commission on Monday.

If your in town for the Stampede Scam Alert, I should buy you couple of drinks. Let me know where you are staying and I'll try to set something up.
bjac409

Walnut, CA

#4211 Jul 10, 2010
WFG is a scam wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's dissect your statement, shall we?
A. "When I die I can leave my residual income to my kids..."
- Your kids will be so glad that they inherit your "residual income" - mostly in red with we call "debt". I am sure they will say, "Daddy, you F-ed it up again!"
B. "If I want I can sell my code back to WFG for a price based on what my business is worth..."
- No, WFG will only pay what they think your business is worth ACCORDING TO THEM. You have NO SAY in that matter. There were past WFG independent contractor that passed away and their next-of-kins didn't even receive a cent from WFG. Go back to your agreement and read again!
C. "if it wasn't MINE I wouldn't be able to do these things."
- Your business is really NOT YOURS. You wouldn't be able to do ANYTHING!
D. "I have no boss. I don't have to answer to ANYONE...not even my upline. I can come and go as I please. I can sell any product I am licensed to sell."
- Your boss IS your up-line, precisely the person "ON THE TOP"! But you won't say "NO" to WFG's conventions do you? You won't say "NO" to selling unsuitable products because WFG's partners give you "Free Sandwiches and Pop" and you can earn high commissions without even knowing what they are, do you?
E. "My official title is whatever I want to call myself."
- You are an insurance salesman, get it right! Dorkie!! You stick your head in your ass just like everyone from WFG!
Mike is in the USA. He can sell his code. One thing I love about you Canadians is your wonderful grammar and spelling. I am not really use to the aggression and hostility from my norther friends.
WFG is a scam

Edmonton, Canada

#4212 Jul 10, 2010
bjac409 wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike is in the USA. He can sell his code. One thing I love about you Canadians is your wonderful grammar and spelling. I am not really use to the aggression and hostility from my norther friends.
Really? Looks like you spelled "northern" wrong, or is it an American spelling?

You are as much of a dork as he is. So are you one of the many reasons that your lovely state is still in bankruptcy?
PayingAttn

Surrey, Canada

#4213 Jul 10, 2010
I was reading an employment law site on Canadian laws and saw this article I've pasted below. I could not help but come back to this site just to post this. This is in response to WFG is a Scam's numerous posts about how in the world some woman with WFG managed to get a job without a background check. My assumption was possibly that the WFG office she worked for was shady and they did not do one, but this article adds another more plausible explanation, which again shows just how different the laws in Canada are when compared to the U.S. I suppose after reading this, you'll need to change your user name to "the Canadian Supreme Court is a Scam". The article is too long, so I'll paste it in two responses.

And as for the reason why I would still chose to sign up with WFG even though I admit that the MLM model is not best suited for this industry due to people with no ethics or poor training causing more harm than good... as I've said many times in my other posts, NOT all WFG reps are the same. The two I met in the office, which include the head of that office, are quite knowledgeable and appear to have their ethics intact.

Here's the article for HOW someone can be hired in CANADA even with a criminal record. Having pratised law in the States, I can say that there is no federal or state law in the US that is similar, they CAN refuse to hire in this situation, whereas, a Canadian company cannot.

A ‘Routine’ Background Check in Canada? There’s No Such Thing
January 13, 2009 at 5:00 am by: Derek Knoechel

In 1990, a 21-year-old woman was caught shoplifting. She then pleaded guilty to a charge of theft, receiving a conditional discharge. Some five years later, she applied for a position with the Montreal police force. So began a 13-year legal odyssey culminating in a Supreme Court of Canada decision (Montréal (City) v. Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, 2008 SCC 48) released in August of 2008.

As part of the background screening process, the Montreal police force became aware of the past guilty plea. It rejected her application on the basis that the guilty plea showed she did not possess the necessary “good moral character” required of police officers. The “good moral character” test was legitimate – it was a statutory requirement. The police force believed this test supported its rejection of the woman’s application.

Thirteen years later, the Supreme Court ruled that the test was indeed legitimate but that the police force had applied it improperly.

As it turns out, one of the legal effects of the conditional discharge the woman had received was that by the time she applied to the police force she had also received an “automatic pardon” for her offense. As a general rule, pardons are intended to help erase the “stigma” that attaches to a criminal conviction or guilty plea.(The fact that the woman was referred to only by her initials, S.N., in the judgment underscores that this goal is difficult to achieve.)

What’s more, Quebec human rights laws expressly provided that employers could not refuse to hire someone merely because of an offense for which he or she had been subsequently pardoned. The court ruled that the police force had unfairly discriminated against her by relying on the mere existence of the woman’s guilty plea.

But what about the “good moral character” test, which also had legal force? The presumption that S.N. had completely recovered her “moral integrity” as a result of the pardon could be countered, but this required actual evidence rather than a preconceived notion of what a guilty plea revealed about her character. The police force could investigate further to determine whether there were other facts that would disqualify the candidate even if the facts related to the offense.

Human rights laws
This case illustrates just one of the many potential pitfalls facing Canadian employers looking to conduct background checks on potential emplo(continued below)

PayingAttn

Surrey, Canada

#4214 Jul 10, 2010
Human rights laws
This case illustrates just one of the many potential pitfalls facing Canadian employers looking to conduct background checks on potential employees. Relying on pardoned criminal offenses is currently prohibited in only a few jurisdictions. But in any event, pardoned offenses may not show up on most criminal records checks, and given the purpose behind pardons, relying on pardoned offenses can be tricky, as the Montreal police force found out).
Several provinces go further and have laws prohibiting the refusal to hire someone on the basis of a criminal conviction unless the employer can show that the offense is directly related to the position. This is not an easy test to meet.

Privacy laws
In addition to the human rights concerns, serious privacy issues are raised each time an employer conducts a background check. The laws governing collection of personal information by employers vary from one Canadian jurisdiction to another. Generally speaking, potential employees should be informed that personal information may be collected and used by the employer to determine the suitability of the candidate for employment, and their consent must be obtained for each collection.

The information requested, whether it be a reference check, credit check, criminal record check, or police record check, must be “necessary” and more than just “nice to have” or “potentially useful.” Once obtained, any confidential information should be stored separately from the human resources employee file and only necessary individuals should be granted access to this information.

Timing issues also arise. Where such checks are required for the position, some employers may choose to fully review the qualifications of applicants prior to engaging in a background check of a short list of candidates. Some employers may wish to make an offer of employment before the check is conducted, in which case the offer should be made conditional upon a satisfactory result being returned.

Background searches are often conducted by third party service providers, but employers remain responsible (and potentially liable) for the collection. Time and effort must be committed to a full consideration of what information should reasonably be requested, as well as the proper use and storage of such information once the employer has collected it.

As indicated above, there are many potential legal issues that can trip up an employer who engages in such checks, even with the best of intentions. As you can see, there is no such thing as a “routine” background check.

And in case you were still wondering about the ultimate fate of the 21-year-old woman caught shoplifting in 1991, you shouldn’t expect to see her as a member of Montreal’s finest any time soon.

The Supreme Court of Canada noted that she had long since abandoned her pursuit of a career as a police officer. It is unlikely that she was even involved in this round of the litigation as it was the police force that brought the issue to the nation’s highest court.
PayingAttn

Surrey, Canada

#4215 Jul 10, 2010
FYI: the above was taken from a website that contains articles for US Companies who have Canadian subsidiaries. http://employmentlawpost.com/northernexposure...
Scam Alert

Calgary, Canada

#4216 Jul 10, 2010
H Landor wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I'd be willing to "Put my money where my mouth is"!!! I'll call the Alberta Securities Commission on Monday.
If your in town for the Stampede Scam Alert, I should buy you couple of drinks. Let me know where you are staying and I'll try to set something up.
I'm staying at the Hyatt. My company is sponsoring some events for the "Real Financial Industry and Professionals" in Calgary. WFG wasn't invited for a reason. I'm free Monday and Thursday. I fly back to Toronto on Sunday. Contact me through this forum, we'll work something out. "WFG is a Scam" if you could join us that would be good too!!!
WFG is a scam

Edmonton, Canada

#4217 Jul 10, 2010
PayingAttn wrote:
FYI: the above was taken from a website that contains articles for US Companies who have Canadian subsidiaries. http://employmentlawpost.com/northernexposure...
Wrong! In any financial institutions dealing with mutual funds and securities dealers, that means at any member branches, a compliance department and an compliance officer must be present to ensured that all documentations are kept safely, all transactions must be within the time constraints, and records of all new and existing employees must be checked and updated to ensure that they are all clean. Even with Goldman Sachs (that has a energy trading floor) and the former Wood Gundy (now CIBC) still has to comply with Canadian regulations which may be slightly different than in the U.S.

Being a U.S. trained lawyer, I am quite surprised that you don't even know basic financial regulations. No wonder you joined WFG!
PayingAttn

Surrey, Canada

#4218 Jul 10, 2010
I hate to burst your bubble, but I have to question your intelligence. You do know that the Supreme Court of Canada trumps the "compliance department" you mentioned, right? You do know that it is the highest court right? You do know that it interprets CURRENT LAWS right?

The background check IS required, I did not say that it wasn't, but what I said was that not every stain on a background check is sufficient reason for a CANADIAN entity to refuse to hire someone. In the court case mentioned, a woman WITH a criminal record applied and was rejected by the Montreal Police Department, the court said that she should not have been rejected for that reason alone for a host of reasons listed in the opinion, all of which are applicable to other Canadian employers.

You seem to not read the posts that disagree with your opinion, and you seem to not understand that EVERY WFG office is run the same way. I don't know how it is that the others spend so much time trying to impart wisdom on you, but I could never do so. Your posts make little sense and are filled with generalizations rather than fact.

Let's pretend that I was in fact wrong, which I am not, because the article refers to a recent Canadian Supreme Court case which I skimmed, but if I JUST joined WFG, how would I know everything about the financial industry in the four days since I joined. It is called training, not learning by osmosis. And I hate to break it to you, but lawyers aren't trained in financial regulations unless they chose to take the ELECTIVE securities course, which I DID take; however, I am speaking about CANADIAN not US law. Not to mention, my post immediately above has nothing to do with the financial industry but instead have everything to do with employment law.
H Landor

Calgary, Canada

#4219 Jul 11, 2010
Scam Alert wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm staying at the Hyatt. My company is sponsoring some events for the "Real Financial Industry and Professionals" in Calgary. WFG wasn't invited for a reason. I'm free Monday and Thursday. I fly back to Toronto on Sunday. Contact me through this forum, we'll work something out. "WFG is a Scam" if you could join us that would be good too!!!
Are you guys running the event at the Westin? Monday is a bit short notice. Thursday would work. I have a function that ends at 4:30, I could meet you at 5:00. "WFG is a Scam" what's your timing like? Did you want to join?

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#4220 Jul 11, 2010
H Landor wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I'd be willing to "Put my money where my mouth is"!!! I'll call the Alberta Securities Commission on Monday.
If your in town for the Stampede Scam Alert, I should buy you couple of drinks. Let me know where you are staying and I'll try to set something up.
Calgary Stampede=Animal Cruelty-Canada’s shameful spectacle!!!

Shame on you two and all who support and sponsor this stupid sport!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Calgary Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
CareVest Investment Corp (Mar '13) 8 hr Pizzedoff 818
Neil Chandran Apr 20 Gotcha 4
News Man charged in murder of Brooks teen (Jul '06) Apr 19 Joey 50
News Drivers confirmed for World Driving Championship Apr 9 Arnold 1
News Canada would pay the price if Toronto's real es... Apr 9 how now brown cow 1
News Soldiers, police and parks staff hike up mounta... Apr 8 Who went and lived 1
O'LEERY " Chicken Buddy Burgers " OUT of DEBATE ! Apr 7 Trey Lawney - Dra... 3
More from around the web