We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
TUC Stakeholder pension
Mensch
Posts: 54 Forumite
A few months ago I received a letter from Prudential that the TUC were withdrawing from their shared SHP scheme. If I didn't want anything to change I didn't have to respond at all and things would continue as normal.
Later, I received another letter stating that no more contributions (from me and my employer) would be made to the original SHP but from 01/12/14 these contributions would go to a new pension.
I called Viewforth (Pru pensions helpline) for advice and was told this was normal and eventually the pensions would merge, forming just the one again in due course.
My query is based on what has happened to the two different pensions since 01/12/2014. The original pension has increased by 8.36% since then but the new one is showing an increase of only 3.11%. Both show the exact same investment funds and as I assume the charges have not changed, what could account for the differing rates?
Any views?
Later, I received another letter stating that no more contributions (from me and my employer) would be made to the original SHP but from 01/12/14 these contributions would go to a new pension.
I called Viewforth (Pru pensions helpline) for advice and was told this was normal and eventually the pensions would merge, forming just the one again in due course.
My query is based on what has happened to the two different pensions since 01/12/2014. The original pension has increased by 8.36% since then but the new one is showing an increase of only 3.11%. Both show the exact same investment funds and as I assume the charges have not changed, what could account for the differing rates?
Any views?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 247K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards