📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Standard Life windfall news

Options
1111214161728

Comments

  • candygirl wrote:
    god im such a bimbo my policy restarted after my divorce so its from march 1990, payments at £27.64 a month and i gopt 404 shares so doe sthis sound better?my original policy was opened in 1986, and this replaced it when i got divorced, sorry for the confusion. :cool: :cool:

    I'm sure that'll fit in much better. My formula would give you 5% more but doesn't account for sex (male or female, not how often), age, smoker etc.

    :)

    GG
    There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.
  • Lorian
    Lorian Posts: 6,253 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    By contributions do you mean no of months x premimum between start date and some month in 2004?
  • ReportInvestor
    ReportInvestor Posts: 3,646 Forumite
    Yes. Contributions = premiums paid to March 30th 2004.

    This takes no account of variables like different deductions for life insurance (based on age/sex/smoking habits/lifestyle/hang-gliding etc. ) - which the Standard number crunchers will make.

    Nor on the impact of charges - higher contributions are going to get higher windfalls because charges before investment will have been less.
  • bobber
    bobber Posts: 59 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    Very useful.

    The variable rate windfall as a % of her contributions is 8.4% se compared to your 7.7%.

    This would seem to indicate three things.
    Women do get more - see the Herald article above!
    The length of endowment policy is not critical as hers was 15 years and yours 25.
    The sum assured [or target amount] is not important. It is the actual contributions made, and when, that matter
    (see my criticism of the Standard Life press spokesman above re the Herald article).

    This does seem to confirm the method I'm using (it's just candygirl that doesn't fit :( ).

    Hope this doesnt put a spanner in the works for your method, but thought I should mention Im actually female too. I was a 22 yr old non smoker and my mum was a 47 yr old non smoker at time we took out the policies - not sure on the implications this has for the life cover premiums then and shares now? Thought I should mention anyway in case it helps your method :)
  • Lorian
    Lorian Posts: 6,253 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    From RI's collected data on % of contriubutions for variable part.

    image001.gif

    Ignores what month in the year, and averages the duplicates for a year.

    - updated
  • jpvic
    jpvic Posts: 148 Forumite
    Got my pack this morning,

    Start date - 18 Feb 1991
    Matures - 2016
    Pay in - £37.40
    current value - £8014.96 @1Feb 2006
    Target - £28000

    Share allocation - 406

    Male voting yes. Keeping shares in the short term as a wait and see.
    _________________________________________

    Doppelter Pfosten danke
  • ReportInvestor
    ReportInvestor Posts: 3,646 Forumite
    To bobber.

    One of you or your mum is an anomaly. But I wouldn't say that to her ;).
    jpvic wrote:
    Male voting yes
    No extra shares for voting yes. This isn't the House of Lords application process ;).
  • jpvic
    jpvic Posts: 148 Forumite


    No extra shares for voting yes. This isn't the House of Lords application process ;).

    When they addressed me as "Dear Sir" I took it as a hint.
    Damn, I'll cancel the ermine order then. :)
    _________________________________________

    Doppelter Pfosten danke
  • chrisxr2
    chrisxr2 Posts: 150 Forumite
    I am tempted to write of to standard life, I am sure that paying in for nearly eleven years has got to be worth more than 32 shares (On top of the 185 everyone gets). As previously said, a nice explanation of how they come to their figures would be most helpful. For the sort of shares i am expecting i am sorely tempted to vote no, whether it would do any good or not remains to be seen.
  • ReportInvestor
    ReportInvestor Posts: 3,646 Forumite
    noahveil wrote:
    Don't see mine - see post 113 - and are you taking LAPR into account ?
    Life Assurance Premium Relief only applies to policies taken out before 14 March 1984. So that would affect yours but no-one else's [to date].

    I hadn't included it because you had worked it our yourself. If you PM me or post the monthly contribution numbers, starting month & windfall shares I could double check your figures on my spreadsheet.
    noahveil wrote:
    On the basis of GG's mine seems rather low :confused:.
    I agree. I don't see why Standard shouldn't count the tax relief that has come into the WP fund thanks to your policy.
    chrisxr2 wrote:
    I am tempted to write to standard life and.....vote no
    Did you double check the start date, including month?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.