Norwich Union £1K windfalls in doubt

baby_boomer

dunstonh wrote: »

I would prefer NU to cancel it (or postpone it) and keep the money during this period.

Times - Aviva to reconsider windfall payments to policyholders in the light of market turmoil

The publicity has been a great way for NU to keep policyholders in the fund.

Now, with MVRs of up to 22%, they are trapped and returns are bound to suffer.

I wonder how many would have withdrawn money before the market crash, if it hadn't been for the potential windfall?

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Dunston just said with profits havent fallen as much though, safe investment with a 10% return sounds pretty amazing to me

Is that in cloud cuckoo land?

baby_boomer

dunstonh wrote: »

With profits funds are best bought at or near the bottom of the market. NU and Pru are the two strongest when it comes to with profits. Personally, the with profits funds on my books bought in 2003 (after the last drop) have returned in excess of 10% p.a. and havent dropped by anything near the levels unit linked funds have.

From the Sunday Times.

NU has turned a £10K [WP Bond] investment into just £11,255 since 2003 which was the bottom of the last bear market.

That return, 12.6%, is less than the £1,899 or 19% achieved by the average balanced-managed fund. (Not a favourite category of dunstonh's but a fair comparator to WP.)

Tom McPhail at HL said, "With profits are meant to "smooth" returns, so you expect less on the way up but a bit of shelter on the way down they aren't doing this, so what's the point?"

So who's right dunstonh. Have NU with profits returned in excess of 10% pa since 2003 or just in excess of 10% TOTAL over five years since 2003 i.e. 2% pa?

Are you talking complete rubbish, or are Hargreaves Lansdown and the Sunday Times?

Someone's telling porkies.

Old_Slaphead

dunstonh wrote: »

With profits funds are best bought at or near the bottom of the market.

Given that any investment is best purchased near the bottom of the market I thought, as a generalisation. WP funds offered more protection when bought at the top of the market rather than bottom(ie effect of 'smoothing' would offer some protection on the way down whereas any upward movements in price are not fully passed on).

dunstonh

So who's right dunstonh. Have NU with profits returned in excess of 10% pa since 2003 or just in excess of 10% TOTAL over five years since 2003 i.e. 2% pa?

I have a group of individuals who purchased NU WP in 2003 who are all drawing 7.5% p.a. All of them have higher values than they started with.

baby_boomer

What is a "value" when it's at home? Your use of alternative & imprecise phrases when it suits you is not very professional.

Not a surrender value, I'll bet.

You should have said that part of the investment had already been withdrawn under MVR free arrangements. It makes a big difference.

dunstonh

What is a "value" when it's at home? Your use of alternative & imprecise phrases when it suits you is not very professional.

Now you are just being pathetic if you dont know what value of an investment means.

baby_boomer

I do apologise. Probably a state of confusion brought about by reading the small print in too many with profits policy terms and conditions .

oldwiring

OT but are 5% withdrawal faculties affected by MVAs?

dunstonh

oldwiring wrote: »

OT but are 5% withdrawal faculties affected by MVAs?

No. You "tend" to find (covering my back for the odd one that doesnt) that the penalty free annual allowance doesnt get the MVR charged to it. However, that only usually applies to automatic withdrawals. Not ad-hoc. E.g. those that are set up with a regular payment (even if annual) are ok but if you ask for a one off 5% withdrawal it would not be.

baby_boomer

dunstonh wrote: »

I have a group of individuals who purchased NU WP in 2003 who are all drawing 7.5% p.a. All of them have higher values than they started with.

dunstonh wrote: »

Now you are just being pathetic if you dont know what value of an investment means.

To clarify, since with profits are rarely that simple - as you know.

Is it

a) the surrender value if they sold now?
b) a paper value subject to a surrender penalty
c) a combination of a) & b) where a) is the 7.5% annual reductions or some other pre-set amount and b) is the remainder.