Budget: requirement for pension advice

Sterlingtimes

I cannot believe that the Government will fund the cost of advice that everyone will now be required to receive. The Government contribution toward this is surely just for policy development.

Presumably, the pension holder will be required to fund. Does this mean that some of us will have to pay for advice that we do not want?

tony4147

I'm guessing that if you can show you have received advice from an IFA etc then you would not have to see Government appointed adviser.

I do think it is a good idea that everyone is pushed down the route of obtaining advice from some recognised adviser, although costs must remain within reason

gadgetmind

It's worth reading the Freedom and Choice consultation paper.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/293079/freedom_and_choice_in_pensions_web.pdf

What kind of advice to provide, and how to fund it, is something they want feedback on. However, this is unlikely to be the kind of made-to-measure in-depth advice that you'd get from an IFA, and far more just someone taking you though the options available and explaining the pros and cons of each in very general terms.

kidmugsy

Sterlingtimes wrote: »

Presumably, the pension holder will be required to fund. Does this mean that some of us will have to pay for advice that we do not want?

I suppose that adds to the case for going into flexible drawdown now, if you qualify. By "now" I mean after March 27th.

dunstonh

cannot believe that the Government will fund the cost of advice that everyone will now be required to receive. The Government contribution toward this is surely just for policy development.

They are not. The £20million is to kick start it. After that, a levy will be charged to providers to fund it (which will in turn be paid for in product pricing as with all the other levies we pay)

Presumably, the pension holder will be required to fund. Does this mean that some of us will have to pay for advice that we do not want?

You wont have to use it.

'm guessing that if you can show you have received advice from an IFA etc then you would not have to see Government appointed adviser.

It may be IFAs or whole of market restricted that are giving the advice under the system as the promise of face to face advice requires enough qualified people to do it. Maybe they will pass it to MAS. We dont know yet.

gadgetmind

dunstonh wrote: »

Maybe they will pass it to MAS. We dont know yet.

Well, that's your guess, but my money is on them getting Atos to do it!

Linton

I suspect this wont be peronalised "financial advice" subject to the current heavy handed consumer protection regime - it would be too expensive. "Guidance" seems more likely to me where the advisor just informs the customer of the options available and their implications.

greenglide

gadgetmind wrote: »

Well, that's your guess, but my money is on them getting Atos to do it!

Along with a ESA medical included in the price:)

gadgetmind

Naaa, Atos just lost that gig, which is why they'll be sniffing around for more easy money.

bigadaj

gadgetmind wrote: »

Naaa, Atos just lost that gig, which is why they'll be sniffing around for more easy money.

And when atos decide that they don't want the contract any more they'll be complaining of death threats from the proto pensioners they've been advising I would assume!

gadgetmind

bigadaj wrote: »

they'll be complaining of death threats from the proto pensioners they've been advising I would assume!

I can see the MSE thread now ...

"ATOs are bulley's!!!!!!!

"My an misses went to see atos fer our penshun meeting. We telled them that we'd saved £20 a month all our lifes and now had over 12 grand saved into our penshuns.

"They said that weed not go enuf to retire and needed to keep working til we was 67! They are nothing but robbin bulley's that dont have any heart or considaration for penshuns like us!"

Of course, that's about an accurate stereotype as the Conservative's "Beer and bingo" one.