Has anyone any experience of using Preferred Pension

Little_Miss_Cornshucks

Can anyone provide any insight on the usefulness of Preferred Pensions which states that it offers free advice.... Is this claim too good to be true?

Your_Hero

Most likely a scam site. There is no company information, no FCA registered numbers, nothing. The company name isn't even FCA authorised, not even as a trading style.

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/OC382824/PREFERRED-PENSION-LLP/directors-secretaries#people-summary

The directors aren't even on the FCA register (http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/indivSearchForm.do)

Little_Miss_Cornshucks

Thank you for the information. I will ask them not to continue contacting me.

Your_Hero

Little_Miss_Cornshucks wrote: »

Thank you for the information. I will ask them not to continue contacting me.

Nothing comes for free. Advice is certainly not free.

In future, use www.unbiased.co.uk to search for your local financial adviser. These are all FCA authorised. Make sure they are independent.

dunstonh

There are an awful lot of cold calling scam companies out there. Unregulated and offering pension reviews. I have just a small firm in rural Norfolk but we have seen several alone this year and have made financial crime reports on two. God knows what the larger firms are seeing.

Genuine regulated companies do not cold call. They do not offer free reviews (as there is no commission so any review has to cost or it is likely to be scam). Never deal with unregulated companies.

Little_Miss_Cornshucks

Thank you both for your insight. It is worrying that there are people who will be contacted by an organisation like this and fall prey to them. Is it worth reporting them to the FSA in the hope that they will take action to shut them down?

atush

What are your qualifications? Are you an IFA? Or are you an FA tied to that company?








This was addressed to the scammer who posted here but it was removed.

jamesd

Jamie, your firm appears to be making false or misleading claims in your page about the single tier pension. Specifically these claims appear to be false:

"The new single-tier pension system arriving in 2016 promises to pay everyone the sum of £144 per week flat rate. But this is misleading, older workers who may have been 'opted out' of additional benefits (also known as the Second State Pension) could lose up to £2,000 per year from their state pension because of it."

Please explain the mechanism by which you assert that an older worker could lose £2,000 from their existing state pension entitlement as a result of the single tier pension rules, given the presence of the Foundation Amount protection for existing accrued benefits.

Of course it also doesn't promise to pay everyone £144 since the minimum number of qualifying years is being increased to ten and those with short work history close to state pension age will not be able to accrue the full amount.

And:

"There is also increasing National Insurance contributions and the millions of workers who won't qualify because of their membership of a defined-benefits pension scheme."

Please explain how membership of a defined benefits pension scheme can cause a worker not to qualify for the single tier pension, given that contracting out only caused loss of SERPS/S2P contributions, not the basic state pension portion.

And:

"The time spent working under, what was known as contracting-out, will not count as full National Insurance contributions, because of the lower rates paid during that time, and workers will be penalised, resulting in reduced pensions."

Please describe what new penalty will apply for being contracted out, noting the Foundation Amount protection and that those who were contracted out will continue to accrue more single tier state pension for years worked after it starts, until their state pension reaches the full single tier level or they reach SPA or stop working/buying years.

And:

"Do you qualify for full single-tier pension?

Likely to be hit worst are the estimated nine million workers who were contracted-out of the state earnings related pension scheme (Serps) between 1978 and 1988."

This is a blatantly false claim, since workers who were contracted out are not among those worst affected but rather are one of the groups that will gain overall. This is because they not only keep their contracted out pension benefits but also continue to accrue more state pension until they either stop working, reach SPA or reach the full single tier level. By contrast a worker who was not contracted out will reach the single tier sooner and get nothing more for those extra years during which the contracted out worker is increasing their entitlement.

You might also want to correct the English of "By ensuring your pensions are not stagnating in some zombie pension fund should be a starting point", perhaps by dropping the word By at the start of the sentence.

You probably won't be able to reply here because this site has a policy that restricts posting by company reps. However, there is a right of reply capability, something that I hope you will use if you believe that any posts about your firm or the guidance or advice given are inaccurate. I'm particularly interested in any corrections or clarifications in relation to my own posts and strongly encourage you to respond if you believe I've written anything inaccurate.

Please cut out spreading misinformation about the single tier pension. It's confusing enough for people without you making the problem worse.

jamesd

atush wrote: »

What are your qualifications? Are you an IFA? Or are you an FA tied to that company?

The firm that they are an authorised representative for uses a restricted panel for some annuity products, so it's not possible for them to be IFAs. Jamie appears to have switched from activities like bulk SMS promotions for lead generation and selling phone numbers to the financial side of things two years ago. presumably continuing the marketing orientation in a different sphere.

Jamie, while this is in part from your own LinkedIn page, MSE operates a policy that personal info can be removed. If for some reason you don't want this information here please use the report button and ask MSE's forum team to remove the personal information.

DaveMcG

jamesd wrote: »

Jamie, your firm appears to be making false or misleading claims in your page about the single tier pension. Specifically these claims appear to be false:

snip.

His claims about the single tier seem to be broadly correct imo. Someone retiring in 2016 who has been contracted out all their working life will not get £144, they will get £113.

jamesd

That would be no different from what they would get under the current rules, since they get the higher of the current or new rules calculation as their foundation amount in 2016. No reduction at all due to the single tier in that case.