• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Oct 2012

H

homer

Member
what did everyone think? I thought the Q1 part on Tax and Solvency II was horrible. Q2 wasn't as bad but in general im not the most confident of passing :(
 
Every now and then examiners get excited about a side issue, like the tax question here and the securitisation question from 2011. In my opinion, this does not test our understanding of the course. That is a real shame after the hours and hours and hours of studying. It is also frustrating when looking at the much more familiar topics asked in the large majority of past papers - it leaves one feeling like there's too much "luck of the draw" with the questions.

It was very frustrating and peculiar that they placed such a strong emphasis on tax and TCF and did not test EV, solvency regimes, or capital.

I have never before left an exam and been met with a feeling of frustration from everyone I've spoken to. I'm sure there's a message in that.
 
Horrific

The word I used when I left the exam hall was "horrific."

I had prepared very well, but felt like I might as well be doing SA3 in parts. I don't expect I'll pass unless they drop the pass mark significantly.
 
Not ususally one to rant about exams, but this one seemed unusually tough...

Agree completely with previous comments. It's so disheartening to put countless hours into learning a 900-page course, only for the paper to cover a few obscure paragraphs.

I (foolishly) flicked through the course trying to find the sections which may have been useful in Q1 and came across section 1.5 of ch6. My favourite part was:

"Knowledge of how the apportionment of investment return is done is not needed for this Subject."

Whilst I agree with the pre-empted retort ("it's not about regurgitating CR, but applying knowledge to the question at hand etc etc"), it all seems a little bit unfair (especially in light of a standard-ish 60-odd marker on S2 the sitting before- though again I'll admit, q's always look easier with hindsight).

I've never been faced with straw-clutching pretty much straight away in an exam before. What a horrible feeling!! It's just annoying/embarrasing to think that the markers will be reading my script thinking "this guy doesn't have a clue"!

Rant over. See you in April :(
 
Back
Top