Standard Life windfall news

noahveil

ReportInvestor wrote:

Life Assurance Premium Relief only applies to policies taken out before 14 March 1984.

I know, but there will be others so, for the sake of consistency.....

So that would affect yours but no-one else's [to date].

Yes, so far.

I hadn't included it because you had worked it our yourself.

What I meant was that you had not included my variable allocation as a percentage of contributions, as given in post # 113, in you list at post # 141.

I don't see why Standard shouldn't count the tax relief that has come into the WP fund thanks to your policy

.
Neither do I.

I rang StL. this AM and the operators don't even know how the variable shares were worked out. Apparently they are receiving thousands of calls for some way of checking that allocations are correct. They're referring these up the line and remain hopeful that something will be forthcoming.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

Marsh_Samphire

25 year endowment started 1993 paying £39.42 a month.
339 shares.

cookie9

25year endowment started in 1989 at £26.08 per month. 446 shares awarded.

ReportInvestor

I'd like to start to explain why the 1980s policies have done so well compared to later ones.

Bank of England base rates from 1984-92 were rarely under 10% (reflecting inflation amongst other things, and investment performance in that time was aiming to consistently beat that 10-14% bank base rate (we now have 4.5% :eek: ).

So on the "Time value of money" argument you can see that £50 pm invested in 1984 was a lot of money.

The equivalent of £128 in 1992 if you had just kept even with base rates assuming an 11% average 1984-92.

And a lot more if Standard had invested it well.

So by 1992, the 1984 crowd had a massive stake in the WP fund

noahveil

ReportInvestor wrote:

I'd like to start to explain why the 1980s policies have done so well compared to later ones.

Might also have something to do with the fact that 1980's policies have been in existence longer than later ones .

Also, annual bonuses on LC endowments remained constant throughout the 80's at 4.75% on sum assured and 6% on attaching bonus.

They only began falling after the declaration for the year ended 15.11.91 ie from declaration for y/e 15.11.92 onwards.

ReportInvestor

We can all appreciate the "longer" element.

I know some people are looking for an explanation as to why the windfall entitlements start to expand exponentially as we head into the 1980s.

I was trying to provide some background.

Thanks for highlighting that turning point which reflects the move to a lower interest rate environment that was the main point of my previous post.

ReportInvestor

If you are replying to this post, please click on "reply", not "quote" - otherwise it reduces bandwith and adds to tedium

Updated version of where we are:

An assessment of variable windfalls based on contributions into endowment policies from the start to March 2004. All 25 year endowments unless stated

April 1982 - ?39.6%? of contributions - hall2056 - A guestimate coz hall had two policies.
?Month? 1983 - 22.5% of contributions - Noahveil (worked out by Nv, not RI)
?June? 1984 - 30.8% of contributions - rolo1952 (contributions & month still approximate).
February 1985 - 23.6% of contributions - Gorgeous George
September 1985 - 20% of contributions - benz
May 1986 - 21.0% of contributions - loveabargin
September 1987 - 18.3% of contributions - savingpennies
December 1987 - 17% of contributions - anonymous (22 year policy)
May 1988 - 14.6% of contributions - monty100
October 1988 - 16.0% of contributions - jorayner
March 1990 - 12.4% of contributions - candygirl
July 1990 - 10.9% of contributions - Mrs GG
February 1991 - 9.9% of contributions - jpvic
July 1992 - 4.5% of contributions - Bella Bargains
September 1992 - 8.4% of contributions - bobber's mum (15 year policy)
September 1992 - 7.7% of contributions - bobber [low cost endowment - 7.7% = an underestimate]
June 1993 - 8.0% of contributions - Marsh Samphire
May 1994 - 6.6% of contributions - Alikay
August 1994 - 6.7% of contributions - loisamelia
August 1996 - 5.5% of contributions - cdon (10 year policy)
?December? 1996 - 2.3% of contributions - chrisxr2
July 1999 - 3.8% of contributions - rubber_soul (10 year policy)

Add on the 185 share / £490 basic windfall to get your total windfall

As you can see, length of investment seems to be critical

Please keep the information coming in

benz

Wife's pension started September 1985, last payment May 1987. Monthly Premium including tax relief £25 .Total Payments £500. (30% in With Profits Fund)

Share Allocation 209

Mine,
Pension details as above
Plus, joint 25 year endowment. Monthly Premium £36.25 Started September 1985.

Share Allocation 818

dazzatheman

Someone said a while back that no-one has posted on shares allocated as a result of a pension.

I opted out of SERPS back in 1988-ish, and to be honest didnt have a clue what i was doing or why as i was 18 ish at the time.


So it has never cost me a penny out of my take home pay so to speak, and i just continued to get an update every year on the with profits fund value / projections. This continued until about 18 mths ago, when i joined an excellent company final salary pension, which i believe means my Standard Life one probably hasnt received additional funds for this last 18 mths.

So i actually thought that i would be higher than average with the share allocation, because i thought the length of time would be a major factor. The fund total value is about £10,000 which must be smallish, because as i said, it is NI contributions only that have gone into it in that time.

I was given 365 shares, so approx the same amount again as per the standard allocation. So to me, the length of time cant be as major as the amount invested in with profits,and i totally agree that it is crazy that we are not given some clear formula to show how it has been worked out, instead of the generalising.

I will vote YES of course, and should probably be glad that for me its free money, with no real loss felt as per some members.

Gorgeous_George

ReportInvestor wrote:

I'd like to start to explain why the 1980s policies have done so well compared to later ones....

Does that also explain why 1980's policies have been hit so hard by the cuts in recent years?



GG