Standard Life FSAVCs Plan

Party_Animal

Just received my annual statement. I've been paying the same amount monthly for 18 years, with 2 years to go. My taxable pension when I retire ( what I might get) per annum, is slightly more than I pay in now. In other words I'll need to live to at least 86 before I start to gain. I would have been better off saving it under the bed. Are there any other options when I retire? I know I can't draw it as a lump sum.
Thanks

dunstonh

My taxable pension when I retire ( what I might get) per annum, is slightly more than I pay in now. In other words I'll need to live to at least 86 before I start to gain

Which assumptions are Std Life using when making those projections? SMPI basis (with inflation) or monetary growth basis (without inflation)? I suspect SMPI basis and using an indexed annuity and possibly with spouse.

I would have been better off saving it under the bed.

No you wouldnt. You are just not reading the assumptions correctly.

Party_Animal

Sorry, I'm not clear on this. It says "what you might get back when you retire"
and
"these rates are reviewed every year by the Board for Actuarial Standards"
It actually says I could end up with less, in which case I'd have been much better with my money under the bed.
Sounds like a very bad investment to me, though I imagine both Standard Life and the former Financial Advisor did ok out of it.

dunstonh

Sorry, I'm not clear on this. It says "what you might get back when you retire"

What assumptions is that based on?

t actually says I could end up with less, in which case I'd have been much better with my money under the bed.

You are not reading it correctly.

Sounds like a very bad investment to me, though I imagine both Standard Life and the former Financial Advisor did ok out of it.

Rather than make assumptions, try and understand what it is saying. You are clearly not reading the information correctly based on what you have said so far.

Party_Animal

First of all, I don't like your attitude
Secondly, there is no indication as to where they get their figures from.
Thirdly, its states very clearly that I may get back less than the figures quoted, figures which, as I said, are only slightly more per annum than I've paid in.
I've used this site for years and always found people very helpful, but your kind of attitude is enough to drive me elsewhere.

dunstonh

Secondly, there is no indication as to where they get their figures from.

Any illustration of benefits comes with an explanation of the assumptions they have used.

Thirdly, its states very clearly that I may get back less than the figures quoted, figures which, as I said, are only slightly more per annum than I've paid in.

The warning that you could get back less than you paid in is a standard investments warning that has been on all investments for very very many years. You would still see it mentioned on investments that have doubled your money as it is a requirement.

I've used this site for years and always found people very helpful, but your kind of attitude is enough to drive me elsewhere.

Stop being so sensitive. You shouldnt post on a forum if you cannot handle the replies. Its not as if anything I have said is rude or aggressive. Either read the example projections correctly and the text that goes with it or get someone to read it to you who does understand it.