Standard Life windfall news

baby_boomer

AFAIK it sounds like you should have heard about a windfall allocation and been given your voting papers.

Do you normally get voting papers for each year's AGM? If not, then there might be a problem. I would ring Standard Life to find out more PDQ.

baby_boomer

pauliepie wrote:

My policy is with profits, and the £43k is the endowments worth.

If so, roughly how much

If you qualify then the only 1999 endowment in the MSE table was taken out in July and paid 3.8% of contributions.

If you have paid nearly £43,000 into your endowment then you might expect a £2,000 windfall, assuming you do qualify.

noahveil

baby_boomer wrote:

That should work in your favour. More of your premiums would have been invested earlier.

I think you've probably made a mistake. Why not PM Reportinvestor with details of what you have paid in and when, so that he can check and confirm this discrepancy, if it is one?

Nope, no mistake has been made here as far as I can tell. The figures have been checked countless times.

From inception in April 1983 to 30 March 2004 the total amount of gross premiums paid was £11804.

The value of variable* shares allocated (1003 X the mid price £2.65 each) was £2658. * total share allocation 1188.

This is 22.5% of the premiums paid up to that date.

Using the net figure for premiums paid (although don't see why this should be the case) it is still only about 25.9%.

baby_boomer

So Standard Life is shafting you .

After your strange comment in post #4 of this thread, where you expressed a desire to leave the average investor less well off, you won't get any sympathy from me.

This thread shows that all but the very long term investors have benefited from a decent basic rate windfall.

Well done to Standard Life for that.

EdInvestor

mae wrote:

I have not heard anything from Standard Life about the demusutalisation but I do have a pension with them. I have looked up my membership certificate and I have been a member since 6/11/98 and the certificate says I am a member of my works group pension plan it says my investments have gone into the managed one fund, the with profits fund and Millenium with profits fund. Does anybody know if I am entitled to the windfall?

Hello Mae

Is the works scheme an occupational one, or a group personal pension scheme?In the former case your trustee will be the member, in the latter you are the member and would be due for a windfall directly in respect of the part of your pension fund which is invested in the "With profits" and "Millenium With profits" funds.

If there is a company pensions or HR department, ask them what the position is.

noahveil

baby_boomer wrote:

So Standard Life is shafting you .

After your strange comment in post #4 of this thread, where you expressed a desire to leave the average investor less well off, you won't get any sympathy from me.

This thread shows that all but the very long term investors have benefited from a decent basic rate windfall.

Well done to Standard Life for that.

I find that a very strange comment :mad: .

I was referring to carpetbaggers who had "invested" the min £20 SHP.

The "average" policyholder would have benefitted from an increased variable allocation.

mae

Thanks Edinvestor. Not sure all it says on my paper works is group pension I will ask the HR department tomorrow
Thanks

baby_boomer

noahveil wrote:

The "average" policyholder would have benefitted from an increased variable allocation.

Now you really are talking out of your backside :rotfl: .

Go back to Reportinvestor's table and you can work out that your comment is simply wrong, if your maths is up to it.

In the circumstances I don't think anyone can rely on you doing the maths for your own policy.

tripnip

I think Standard Life would have been fairer to people of 7-10 years membership if they had given a basic windfall (perhaps 100 shares) to all policyholders and a variable allocation (perhaps also subject to a minimum of say 150 shares) to those who had been members in 2000 before the previous vote. As it is, pre-2000 members of perhaps less than 10 years standing in 2004 are having to foot the bill to buy the votes of post 2000 members, with a disproportionate share going to people with policies from the 1980s.

IanPL

I am very concerned that the impending demutualisation of Standard Life is not being handled in an appropriate or fair manner. Time is of the essence, as the decision should be taken in early June.
You may well be aware of the proposal? However, it is the ramifications of this, should the demutualisation be voted in, that will result in a large proportion of the members being put at a huge disadvantage and suffer an unfair financial penalty. The information given states plainly that the proposal will be fair and even-handed; clearly this is absolutely NOT the case!
Basically, all existing members with the right to vote on the date of demutualisation will be allocated shares in the company according to a formula depending on existing policies held with Standard Life at that time. ONLY members resident in the UK, plus those in Austria, Canada, Channel Isles, Germany, Ireland and the Isle of Man will be able to accept their share allocation, retain them, or sell them at market value. They will also be able to purchase some additional shares at a discounted price.
However, for ALL other members resident outside those countries mentioned above, there will be NO choice in receiving their shares, nor the option to purchase additional shares at a preferential price. They will be sent a cheque for their allocated shares, at market value.
The proposal document states clearly that "In the enclosed proposal document you will find lots of detailed information including: how much your shares could be worth, how we are protecting your interests as a policyholder, who checks that what we are proposing is fair and how - if you decide to keep your shares - you will also have the opportunity to buy additional shares at a discounted price."
I am, of course, unaware of how many members fall into this 'overseas' and non-entitled bracket; I should imagine that there would be a great number, - retired, or having moved to France, for example, where I happen to reside having retired there. I am also not aware of the number of these members who realise that the proposal is certainly not a fair one, and that our 'interests' are most definitely NOT being protected!
I have written to Standard Life to register my concerns, and also to ask whether one could legally appoint a UK resident - solicitor, relation or friend, perhaps, as a legal representative to receive one's share quota and option to buy additional shares at a discount.
Initially, I received no acknowledgement despite the urgency of my request. I therefore, sent a further reminder last night, and did get a reply this morning stating that due to the high costs involved in organising the requirements in each overseas territory, no such requirements would be forthcoming, and shares would only be sent to the aforementioned countries. I had to ask again about my proposal to nominate a legal representative in the UK to receive the shares on my behalf, and have now just heard that this is not permitted.
The voting form as to whether to approve the demutualisation has to be returned by 28th May, so time is short. I am at a loss as to know what can be done to rectify this injustice and unfair proposal; I am concerned that a very large number of members might be completely unaware of the consequences of voting to approve the motion to demutualise.
Does anyone else share my fears?
IanPL