final salary pension scheme

Brogden

dunstonh wrote: »

Ill health is a common justification that works a lot of the time. it is one of the easier ways to get a case through.

Dunston,

It cannot have anything to do with 'the easiest way.' That really does sound pretty awful. We are talking about people's lives and health.......'to get a case through.....?' What are you talking about?

What about the best financial interests of the deferred pensioner and their family?

I have said enough.

Brogden

Turbinedave wrote: »

Thank you for the kind words Brogden . As stated DB pension are gold plated and transfer is only advisable in certain cases as DunstonH states , now then where's that Ferrari dealer ��

:cool::cool::cool:!!!!

Malthusian

Brogden wrote: »

Dunston,

It cannot have anything to do with 'the easiest way.' That really does sound pretty awful. We are talking about people's lives and health.......'to get a case through.....?' What are you talking about?

What about the best financial interests of the deferred pensioner and their family?

I have said enough.

I believe all Dunston means is that ill health is one of the more clear cut cases where a DB transfer can be objectively justified. If the client has no spouse and does not expect to live long, and his primary concern is what will be paid to his children, the death benefits under a SIPP can be many times better than they would be under the DB scheme (possibly just return of contributions).

So that is a sound, rational reason for transferring out of a DB scheme which can be backed up with figures, as opposed to all of the reasons that amount to "I want to transfer out because I feel like it". If you feel one way today you may feel a different way tomorrow which is why cases based on "the client felt like it" are viewed across the industry as a complaint rating to happen.

Brogden

Malthusian wrote: »

I believe all Dunston means is that ill health is one of the more clear cut cases where a DB transfer can be objectively justified. If the client has no spouse and does not expect to live long, and his primary concern is what will be paid to his children, the death benefits under a SIPP can be many times better than they would be under the DB scheme (possibly just return of contributions).

So that is a sound, rational reason for transferring out of a DB scheme which can be backed up with figures, as opposed to all of the reasons that amount to "I want to transfer out because I feel like it". If you feel one way today you may feel a different way tomorrow which is why cases based on "the client felt like it" are viewed across the industry as a complaint rating to happen.

Yes, I am sure that is what he meant but there are a lot of considerations outside of the loss of guarantees of income payments for life..

Many people will want to consider the position from the point of view of the spouse but even more pertinently the children and I have to mention that damned term again......'alarm bells are ringing' is just not good enough. Things need to be discussed and then acted upon when a sensible conclusion has been reached with a qualified adviser. The client has their needs and it cannot all be about IFA's avoiding risk. IFA's must provide a service which is useful / desired / required. There are enough threats to the occupation as it is.....as we all know.

If some people have no patience with this debate then that is fine. Some have vested interests.....yes. Some may be adopting a 'mindset' in order that they may justify what they are and the limitations of what they can actually advise upon.

I have had a very good IFA experience. Why? Because everything was placed on the table and we both fully understood what each other were saying. A myriad of risks were spelled out to me.....just in case anybody thinks it is all easy.....look for the guy who will sign the letter......most certainly NOT SO....no way at all.

Large fee to pay but it is worth it. The paperwork is all in the post and I hoping this will all be concluded in the next week or two.

Brogden

hyubh wrote: »

If an IFA doesn't want your business, find another one that does. Given what you have articulated on another MSE board about your evolving sense of morality in financial matters however, dare I suggest that the IFAs who have shied away from you have dodged a potential bullet...? /QUOTE]

OK…… ‘hyubh’….now there is an anonymous sounding name. It is a pity you don’t read posts properly before wading in with your bile. This is a little one-sided isn’t it?

I have a short questionnaire containing 1000 questions. If you could answer those as honestly as you can we will then be in a positon to evaluate and discuss the quality of your own morality. We may also be able to strike a price on the likelihood of you getting through the pearly gates. In the meantime I at least will categorise you as ‘troll.’

OK…..final words…..I appeared again on this forum when glancing through some posts and finding an innocent poster without any particular knowledge of the pensions world being (in his words) ‘wound up’ by what I might describe as ‘the crew.’ I understand and sympathise having had experience of this and like a mad fool here I am again……one last time.

Included in this ‘crew’ is at least one financial services professional but no doubt more as I am sure not everybody is being completely upfront about what they are. A lot of these individuals protect each other and slap each others’ backs from time to time. The mood is fairly aggressive to people asking question and there is a competition to appear to be ‘the one who knows the most.’ Whilst it would be crazy to say that this is the face of the UK Financial Services Industry, it is sadly a very poor place for any innocent person to start as they nervously write a post, asking for a little assistance or to discuss something which is maybe puzzling or troubling them.

I am not that person but I have wished to discuss the odd point and unlike some here do not have the answer to everything. When I have posted, I must have naively thought this could be discussed kindly and tactfully. The experience has left me feeling weary and abused.

For me the forum is failing in its purpose and it fails because of a number of the people who are on it. I am sure I must have inadvertantly touched raw nerves or ‘challenged what must not be challenged’ to be treated with such contempt but I am not concerned about being marginalised. Where I sincerely believe something and ten others profess to have the opposite opinion, they will not see me compromise my beliefs for the purposes of being ‘on the same side.’

There are some nice folk on here who have been very helpful and I have thanked those people privately. To the ones whom I describe above…….I will be very pleased to have no further involvement with you.

dunstonh

It is funny that when attempts to explain why something is the way it is, that some people consider it protectionism or promoting. Surely it is better to understand why we are in the situation we are and why these things happen.

Explanation as to why it is as it is does not mean you agree with the situation or consider it ideal. It does at least put you in an informed position rather than one of ignorance. However, if you prefer to live in Daily Mail land then that is your choice. Just don't criticise those that like to base their knowledge on facts.

Brogden

dunstonh wrote: »

It is funny that when attempts to explain why something is the way it is, that some people consider it protectionism or promoting. Surely it is better to understand why we are in the situation we are and why these things happen.

Explanation as to why it is as it is does not mean you agree with the situation or consider it ideal. It does at least put you in an informed position rather than one of ignorance. However, if you prefer to live in Daily Mail land then that is your choice. Just don't criticise those that like to base their knowledge on facts.

I am not so much referring to anything you have said Dunston but certain malicious posts which preceeded my last post have since been removed by the site moderators. You may not have seen them.

I would finish by saying I base everything on facts. I have said what I am doing and I am doing that. These are facts.....it is real and it is happening.
It is a fact also that I needed the services of an IFA with permission from the FCA to advise on DB transfers. I sourced him, he advised and I paid his fee.

I am not as green as you think Dunston. Whilst I have never taken the route of being an IFA, I am Level 4 qualified. The advising IFA adjudged me to be a 'sophisticated investor.' Ridiculous maybe but this is another 'fact.'

That's it.....I'll quit and let's remain friends albeit with differing views .

dunstonh

I am not so much referring to anything you have said Dunston but certain malicious posts which preceeded my last post have since been removed by the site moderators. You may not have seen them.

i didnt see them and took your reference to mean me. I apologise.

Brogden

dunstonh wrote: »

i didnt see them and took your reference to mean me. I apologise.

There is absolutely no need to apologise.