Young, self-employed, starting pension...

atush

The point for the OP is, as it stands now, that is not the law and transfers are banned.

freelancer123

Thanks all.

Better explain more why I was looking into Nest other than the fact they are accountable to Parliament etc (though some may think this is worthless!):

- Can pay in as little as I like for now, don't have to set up a direct debit quite yet etc
- They aren't out to make a profit which probably makes it safer than other PPs
- The above point surely also means the rates won't be as bad as a lot of private pensions, doesn't it? That's what they claim anyway.
- I wouldn't know where to start with other pensions. Nest keeps it pretty simple, albeit through lack of flexibility, but as a young scamp I know **** all about different funds, charges, conditions, and any other tricks private companies might have come up with to make a profit out of people's pensions.

I'm not set against companies making profits out of pensions, but when I don't understand how they're doing it and how scrupulous their methods are, it's hard to judge... On the other hand there is a bit of an air of, "don't worry your pretty little head about it, we have your interests at heart" to the Nest website!

Just trying to think about my future, as precocious as that makes me feel! Doesn't look like there'll be much of a state pension in 40 years' time...

dunstonh

- Can pay in as little as I like for now, don't have to set up a direct debit quite yet etc

Just like a stakeholder pension can.

- They aren't out to make a profit which probably makes it safer than other PPs

or makes them less safer perhaps as they do not have the surplus reserves that others may have. However, it is totally irrelevant as pensions dont work that way.

- The above point surely also means the rates won't be as bad as a lot of private pensions, doesn't it? That's what they claim anyway.

Pensions dont have rates. So, this point is irrelevant.

- I wouldn't know where to start with other pensions. Nest keeps it pretty simple, albeit through lack of flexibility, but as a young scamp I know **** all about different funds, charges, conditions, and any other tricks private companies might have come up with to make a profit out of people's pensions.

I'm sorry but this is wrong as well. NEST is a multi-charge pension. Most pensions you would look at are mono charged. ie. they just have one charge. So, how is a multi-charge pension simpler than those with just one charge?

What are these so called tricks that you are referring to? Seeing as unit linked funds all work the same way, how would these tricks work?

Doesn't look like there'll be much of a state pension in 40 years' time...

There hasnt been much of one of the last 40 years either. The state pension is actually relatively stable. It is benefits that are likely to be in decline.

jamesd

The forum rules haven't changed since 2011 when you last broke them and said "sorry if my post broke the rules... I'll give them a thorough read for the future". You're still required to get permission to post as a company rep. Even if approved for that, "If reps are trying to promote their products ... then please report them ... and we may remove the 'company representative' privilege". However, NEST has, or at least had, an official company representative already. Also note that "What are they allowed to post about? It's a strictly reactive policy. Each company rep is allowed one thread to respond to".

NEST is more costly than the best alternative products around, for a much more limited range of investments. Sadly, NEST didn't manage to meet the pricing target suggested in the Pensions Commission Reports and is more costly than recommended there.

Unfortunately for employees, NEST illustrates one of the problems found in the Office of Fair Trading report: the employer makes the choice for the employees, without strong incentives to pick the best for the employees rather than the easiest for the employer.

So far as the Pension Policy Institute table on page 5 of Briefing Note 64 goes, eight of the ten cases in the table show NEST as more expensive than Now: Pensions, without allowing for the reduced monthly charge that Now: Pensions has implemented for low earners. The two cases where NEST is cheaper are for someone who invests from ages 25 to 30 then leaves the money alone until state pension age. Not really the sort of case that it's good to see happening.

The PPI doesn't verify the name and address used so anyone who wants to read the full report can just use dummy info. That request for personal info isn't shown once you've given it once. I'll probably read it all later, since it's the sort of thing that I find interesting.

atush

Thanks James, when I read this earlier it made me uneasy. I didn't realize they had done it before.


So I have reported too.

jamesd

Thanks. NEST does have some useful attributes - like being forced to take anyone. Just... not really the best of the options.

dunstonh

This safety you think NEST has. Maybe you should take a read of this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/10184734/Savers-in-Nest-flagship-pension-scheme-to-bear-cost-of-1.4m-fraud.html