What type of pension?

EdInvestor

Not free, but have a look at the HL Sipp and you'll see what I mean.

https://www.hargreaveslansdown.co.uk

To get free, you have to buy shares and hold them long term

whiteflag_3

EdInvestor wrote:

Not free, but have a look at the HL Sipp and you'll see what I mean.

https://www.hargreaveslansdown.co.uk

To get free, you have to buy shares and hold them long term

On the website, there are dealing charges for shares, what do you get for free?

Whats wrong with the OP going to a 1% charged stakeholder/pp and then switching to a SIPP further down once a fund has been built up and they have learned abit about investment and are no longer totally confused by financial jargon? Seems like the best compromise to me

whiteflag_3

Pal wrote:

Personally I cannot understand why Deemy, who is obviously pretty bright, has such a mental block when it comes to understanding SIPP charges, no matter how many times the same points are made.

Pal this is what Deemy posted as a reply to me in another thread recently

"

What is it ?

What do you want ?

Bloomin eck another stalker...

I guess you want to drag me back to the other thread ... believe me you DON'T WANT ME TO ! BUt I am respecting ISAMURFS request To stay on topic !!!! (Which you would be well advised to take notice off !

Unless you really want me to chase you round the board reminding that your an IFA Wolf trying to flog junk to potential lambs.

Pretty bright !

Pal

EdInvestor wrote:

Not free, but have a look at the HL Sipp and you'll see what I mean.

www.hargreaveslansdown.co.uk

To get free, you have to buy shares and hold them long term

0% for monies invested in cash and funds that pay us renewal commission. For all other investments, we charge an annual fee of 0.5% + VAT up to a maximum of £200 + VAT per annum (charged quarterly in arrears)*

So thats either 0% or a 0.5% charge on funds up to £40,000....

Artemis Global Growth (the first on the list):

Initial Charge (%) 5.25 Annual Charge (%) 1.5 HL Initial Saving (%) 5.00HL Annual Saving (%) 0.250

Now assuming that the HL figures are the discounts that they have managed to get off the headline charges, there is still an annual charge of 1.25% on that fund and an initial charge of 0.25%, on top of HL's own charges.

So where are the zero charge funds then? Why is the above any better than using a normal Personal Pension policy?

What is your financial connection to Hargreaves Lansdown?

EdInvestor

My point was that HL is the best Sipp for those who want to invest in funds.

As I've said many times, the main advantages of Sipps are that you can invest your pension in shares and property.

It may be cheaper to use an execution only Sipp to access external funds than insurers like Skandia.

Try checking the costs on the FSA site:

https://www.fsa.gov.uk/tables

EdInvestor

What is your financial connection to Hargreaves Lansdown?

Excuse me :mad:

I have no financial connection to anyone who makes money out of financial services. I am associated with the Investors' Association , a non-profitmaking lobby group,whose aim is to reform the financial services industry in the interests of small investors.

All IA associaties (including me) work on a voluntary basis.Our website runs a few ads which generate small amounts of money which pay the running costs of the IA website.

That's it.

How about you?

dunstonh

It may be cheaper to use an execution only Sipp to access external funds than insurers like Skandia.

Please please please stop comparing apples with oranges. There is no point comparing one product at full cost against another product with nil/discounted commission. You should compare products on equal terms. The FSA tables are next to useless as they assume full cost and most business isnt transacted at full cost.

If Skandia was arranged as single premium on nil commission terms, there would be no bid offer spread on the funds purchased. Indeed, there would be an allocation of 100.6%. Plus every 5 years from the end of year 4, you would get 1% bonus (of the fund value) paid back into the plan. With only the annual management charges to worry about, the Skandia pension could beat a SIPP on comparable terms.

I'm not posting this as a recommendation of Skandia but just referring to them as Ed used it as an example. The information is provided as a balance to that example.

EdInvestor

There is no point comparing one product at full cost against another product with nil/discounted commission. You should compare products on equal terms. The FSA tables are next to useless as they assume full cost and most business isnt transacted at full cost.

The same product often comes with very high charges, medium sized charges
and low charges.

I prefer the latter and so do most Moneysavers I imagine, that's why we're all here.:)

Many people do not know however that there are wide variations in charges and how to access the cheaper ones.Hence the reason the issue is constantly coming up.

It is usually quite easy to get the same product ( a fund, say) at all three charge levels. So I make no apology for drawing people's attention to the cheapest way of getting a product.

If they wish to pay extra for additional services by going through a bank or an IFA, that's up to them.

dunstonh

It is usually quite easy to get the same product ( a fund, say) at all three charge levels. So I make no apology for drawing people's attention to the cheapest way of getting a product.

You werent doing that though. You were comparing a full cost personal pension against a low cost SIPP. If you wanted to draw peoples attention to the cheapest way of getting a product, then why not compare the personal pension on the same terms as the SIPP?

Deemy

The key saving with SIPPS is that you don't pay the exhoberant management fees which can go as high as 5% per annum !!!

Imagine how management fees eat into potential gains some decades down the road !

Stick with SIPPS if you want to maximise gains