Santander Pension Query

xylophone

Write to the administrator and ask for the figures for pre 88, post 88 and excess.

Ask which method was chosen for revaluation of GMP.

Ask how excess revalues.

Ask if when you draw your pension at 60 you will receive only unrevalued GMP plus excess revalued to age 60.

Ask how the pension will increase in payment.

Ask whether there will be a step up at age 65.

The Scheme has no obligation to increase that part of your scheme pension that relates to pre 88 GMP after you reach GMP age and the post 88 GMP only up to 3% - under the current state pension system, such increases may have been paid with the state pension ( although where a person had a deferred pension increasing by Fixed Rate in deferment, the COD was likely to be so much higher than pre 97 Additional State pension that any such increases would have been unlikely for several years).

You will receive state pension in the new scheme in which the increase with state pension system will no longer apply.

Ask the administrator what increases will apply to that part of your pension relating to pre and post 88 GMP after you reach age 65.

Obtain a state pension statement. https://www.gov.uk/future-pension-centre

meantime

xylophone wrote: »

At 65 there is a step up.

How does the Santander Scheme match up?

There is a step up at 65 in my 2014 quotation but not in my two earlier, higher, quotations.

Would it be useful to post the quotations here?

meantime

xylophone wrote: »

Write to the administrator and ask for the figures for pre 88, post 88 and excess.

Ask which method was chosen for revaluation of GMP.

Ask how excess revalues.

Ask if when you draw your pension at 60 you will receive only unrevalued GMP plus excess revalued to age 60.

Ask how the pension will increase in payment.

Ask whether there will be a step up at age 65.

The Scheme has no obligation to increase that part of your scheme pension that relates to pre 88 GMP after you reach GMP age and the post 88 GMP only up to 3% - under the current state pension system, such increases may have been paid with the state pension ( although where a person had a deferred pension increasing by Fixed Rate in deferment, the COD was likely to be so much higher than pre 97 Additional State pension that any such increases would have been unlikely for several years).

You will receive state pension in the new scheme in which the increase with state pension system will no longer apply.

Ask the administrator what increases will apply to that part of your pension relating to pre and post 88 GMP after you reach age 65.

Does the fact that there is a step up at 65 mean that there is no excess?

meantime

xylophone wrote: »

Do you have access to BenPal?

If I have they haven't informed me of it. The scheme booklet which was until recently available online (on Mercer's website?) seems to have disappeared.

xylophone

Does the fact that there is a step up at 65 mean that there is no excess?

The excess is what is over and above your GMP.

When you left, you left your pension benefits in the scheme.

Your pension benefits consisted of your pre 88 GMP, your post 88 GMP and the amount over that.

The scheme has to pay you your revalued GMP at GMP age.

Your Scheme Pension Age is earlier.

They might choose to pay you your revalued excess at age 60 but the unrevalued GMP.

Before GMP age, your pension will increase in payment as your Scheme Rules require but at GMP age your pension will be split out again into its component parts, pre 88 GMP, post GMP and the excess.

There may then be a step up so that the GMP is at the correct value at GMP age, taking into account increases on the whole pension received since 60.

You will need to ask the Administrator how the GMP portion will increase in payment after GMP age.

xylophone

If I have they haven't informed me of it. The scheme booklet which was until recently available online (on Mercer's website?) seems to have disappeared.

http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2334532/santander-scheme-hires-jlt-for-admin-contract

"The trustee of the Santander UK Group Pension Scheme has hired JLT Employee Benefits (JLT EB)for administration services across its defined contribution (DC) and defined benefit (DB) schemes. Previously, Santander's administration was run by various firms. Within the SUKGPS, JLT ran six of the scheme's DB sections, while Mercer ran the legacy Alliance & Leicester (A&L) DB section and Capita the A&L DC section. Towers Watson ran the bank's large DC scheme, the Santander Retirement Plan. JLT won the contract..."

Dell007

I'm in exactly the same position, and like you based my financial planning on the figures quoted in the original quotation from Mercer, (on behalf of Santander) asking if I wanted to take my pension early.

I do genuinely believe this is negligence, and am currently following up with JLT, though I'm not very impressed by their level of service, or the quality of the work they undertake, based on our communication up to now.

Their explanations are very opaque which can't help but make one suspicious of their motives. They do not explain their changed approach to GMP and what that might mean at age 65, and given for most people familiarity with pensions is low, one would have thought a responsible organisation would provide better customer care

agarnett

This would appear to be the crucial disclosure:

The A&L Section of the Santander (UK) Group Pension Scheme has a substantial deficit. As at 31 March 2013 this was £135 million on an ongoing basis and over £1 billion on a discontinuance (or winding up) basis. The Trustee and the Company are working to improve the funding position in the interests of all members. The Trustee considers that it is not in the interests of the benefit security of all the members to payout benefits which are greater than the rules or the law require.

The Trustee should resign if this is the best answer it has.

The substantial deficit should have long ago been eliminated by Santander.

JLT is complicit in misleading a heap of deferred pensioners.

The crookedness within the pension industry is breathtaking.

Unless you are an active member represented by a strong union, the financial services industry thinks nothing of cannibalising the benefits of its past employees who no longer wield power enough to protect their own benefits.

I am sickened to the pit of my stomach by this story, which I have only just seen. It explains what I think might be a similar inconsistency in one of my own deferred DB pensions taken over by JLT a few years ago.

meantime

Dell007 wrote: »

I do genuinely believe this is negligence, and am currently following up with JLT, though I'm not very impressed by their level of service, or the quality of the work they undertake, based on our communication up to now.

The letter I copied above came from Santander, not JLT. PM me if you'd like contact details.

dart999

I am in eaxctly the same boat as many of the previous posts. I have been in discussions with JLT and via the Pensions Advisory Service about the whole mess and appaling treatment by both Santander and JLT for the last 18 months. I have all previous documentation referring to my deferred pension including the Girobank Scheme Rulesa Booklet. It all goes completely against what Santander via JLT are now trying to do.
I understand there was a meeting of the Trustees on 2nd July 2015 to review their decision to reduce the benefits payable. I am awaiting the outcome with interest.