"Daybreak confusion over pensions today – apology" blog discussion 15 February 2011 at 1:07PM edited 15 February 2011 at 1:09PM in Martin's blogs & appearances & MoneySavingExpert in the news 54 replies 7.2K views

Former_MSE_Helen

This is the discussion to link on the back of Martin's blog. Please read the blog first, as this discussion follows it.

Read Martin's "Daybreak confusion over pensions today – apology" Blog.

Please click 'post reply' to discuss below.

jamesd

Your comments were OK in the context and with today's rules. Usually would have been a better word than have to but that's life and the nature of the medium.

Trying to explain income drawdown is a lot more fiddly and even though it's often the best purely financial option (100% spousal benefit at no extra cost) it's too complicated for many people.

backinbusiness

As a relatively new MSE-er this is a bit beyond me.

But ignore them - I think they are jealous

Terri31

I don't know what their problem is. Sounds like an invention to be honest! I'd like an investigation please into who they are and what their real agenda is, because it's not in OUR [the majority of the people, IMHO] interests!

The discussion wasn't even about pensions and the word 'drawdown' was never used.

Whether or not, I cannot imagine anyone using the information given out on TV as anything but a guide and starting point for further investigation and analysis. No advice can be tailored to suit everyman; we all have to apply information matched to our individual situation.

Perhaps a similar disclaimer in the credits or wherever could protect you from further fatuous complaints such as these, Martin.

martinwh

I'm a fan of Martins', and much of the advice given is extremely helpful for consumers. However, when commenting on Pension and Investment products on TV, much more care should be taken. Financial Advisers have to qualify to make sure they fully understand these products in full. They also have to be registered before they are able to offer any advice to a single consumer. Any advice they give that is deemed to be unsuitable can result in them having to pay compensation, fined or de-registered from being able to give advice.

On that basis I find it worrying that media outlets like the BBC and ITV are able to get unqualified people like Martin to come on air and effectively give advice to thousands of people on TV without any come back. The media should seek the opinion of highly qualified advisers for this type of TV spot.

MSE_Martin

martinwh wrote: »

I'm a fan of Martins', and much of the advice given is extremely helpful for consumers. However, when commenting on Pension and Investment products on TV, much more care should be taken. Financial Advisers have to qualify to make sure they fully understand these products in full. They also have to be registered before they are able to offer any advice to a single consumer. Any advice they give that is deemed to be unsuitable can result in them having to pay compensation, fined or de-registered from being able to give advice.

On that basis I find it worrying that media outlets like the BBC and ITV are able to get unqualified people like Martin to come on air and effectively give advice to thousands of people on TV without any come back. The media should seek the opinion of highly qualified advisers for this type of TV spot.

I have some sympathy for your point of view. Whenever I'm asked about investment products (its not a subject I would ever suggest) I back away as its not my subject - I have said on air many times "I don't cover investing".

Pensions are different - but only in generic practice of ensuring peopel save for their retirement not in the products and what to do - i focus more on state than private pensions anyway

Yet this wasn't a pensions piece it was an 'EU ruling' piece primarily about car insurance with annuities and other things as one of the range of things affected and one of the most substantial hits as Im sure you know.

What was said was reporting a predicted price change- there was no intent to tell people how to sort their retirement fund out and what products to go for, its not something I'd do personally.

If you've watched what was said (and Im sure you have) then I'd be very surprised if you disagreed. The question was just about clearing up what an annuity is for the many people who don't know.

spadoosh

Martin c'mon, you dont have to defend yourself. Like you said you took it in the context of the conversation. If I asked you what the weather was like, i wouldnt expect you tell me what it was like in 7 different continents!

And i didnt have a clue what you were on about anyway, know absolutely nothing about pensions, so i still love you and am grateful for all the help your giving!

brianrhill

MSE_Martin wrote: »

I have some sympathy for your point of view. Whenever I'm asked about investment products (its not a subject I would ever suggest) I back away as its not my subject - I have said on air many times "I don't cover investing".

Pensions are different - but only in generic practice of ensuring peopel save for their retirement not in the products and what to do - i focus more on state than private pensions anyway

Yet this wasn't a pensions piece it was an 'EU ruling' piece primarily about car insurance with annuities and other things as one of the range of things affected and one of the most substantial hits as Im sure you know.

What was said was reporting a predicted price change- there was no intent to tell people how to sort their retirement fund out and what products to go for, its not something I'd do personally.

If you've watched what was said (and Im sure you have) then I'd be very surprised if you disagreed. The question was just about clearing up what an annuity is for the many people who don't know.

Martin

Firstly, pensions are investments. The feedback you are getting from the professional advisers in the main is that your comments on Daybreak clearly demonstrated a complete lack of expertise and experience.

Citing a lack of time as an reason to make an error that the greenest IFA wouldn't make indicates that you are not taking this seriously enough.

Consumers believe you are a money expert. However, do you not agree that you have an obligation to consumers in ensuring they understand that where you may have expertise in finding deals from Pizza Hut or car insurance, this does not extend to complex regulated products or advice areas, particularly such as this where decisions are often irrevocable.

SandraScarlett

Martin, I think this is a case of experts thinking that the likes of you have no right to try and join their club! As far as my DH is concerned, and he knows rock all about finance, pensions etc, you always explain things as if you were addressing him personally, without sounding patronising! And he can then understand them.:)

It's thanks to you, and your unique way of explaining things, and setting up this site, that your followers are not deeper in the mire than we could be. If someone was thinking of getting a mortgage/insurance policy/annuity etc. surely they would listen to/read your info, to give them some idea, and then seek professional advice.

Carry on with the brilliant work Martin! :T

xx

BackOnTrack

Anyone who uses what they heard on Daybreak as a basis for financial decisions needs their head looked to be honest.

Quentin

brianrhill wrote: »

The feedback you are getting from the professional advisers in the main is that your comments on Daybreak clearly demonstrated a complete lack of expertise and experience.

Mandy Rice Davies would have know how to reply to this!