Pension scam victims lose an average £91,000 each - MSE News

Former_MSE_Megan_F

Pension scam victims lose an average £91,000 each leaving them struggling to make ends meet during retirement, two regulators are warning...

Read the full story:
'Pension scam victims lose an average £91,000 each'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.

dunstonh

A lot of the problem is
a) people are generally trusting of those that they speak to
b) scammers tell lies
c) often people don't like to be told the truth and will go with the option they want to hear.

I had someone who I tried to stop them from being scammed but he chose to believe the scammer and not me. Mainly because I told him he couldn't access the funds and that doing so was fraud whereas the scammer told him that it was all fine and they could get him a lump sum.

On another one, the scammer lied about being an adviser (he wasnt) and totally misrepresented the projections on the statement (stating the low projection was the actual return and not an example - low projections nowadays often show a loss example). I managed to get that one stopped just in time and got it reported to the regulator. And the regulator did actually ask for further info to investigate (unlike the other cases I reported where they told me they didnt want to know).

aj23_2

45-65? Most of them well be in work still even if early accessing. This article is talking about hardly anyone.

westv

Fools and their money.......

worried_jim

westv wrote: »

Fools and their money.......

Sadly. .

Ectophile

aj23 wrote: »

45-65? Most of them well be in work still even if early accessing. This article is talking about hardly anyone.

It's a bit late to scam someone after they have cashed in their pension fund and retired.



The scammers are looking for people who are nearing retirement and have a few hundred thousand pounds stashed away in their pension fund. That money can still be transferred into any other fund if the holder desires.

232607

dunstonh wrote: »

A lot of the problem is
a) people are generally trusting of those that they speak to
b) scammers tell lies
c) often people don't like to be told the truth and will go with the option they want to hear.

I had someone who I tried to stop them from being scammed but he chose to believe the scammer and not me. Mainly because I told him he couldn't access the funds and that doing so was fraud whereas the scammer told him that it was all fine and they could get him a lump sum.

On another one, the scammer lied about being an adviser (he wasnt) and totally misrepresented the projections on the statement (stating the low projection was the actual return and not an example - low projections nowadays often show a loss example). I managed to get that one stopped just in time and got it reported to the regulator. And the regulator did actually ask for further info to investigate (unlike the other cases I reported where they told me they didnt want to know).

Unfortunately A, B & C are never going to change so something else has to change.

Would putting more onus on the pension releasing Co to check the credentials of the receiving Co & the facts concerning the dialogue of the transfer help eradicate this?
I'm sure this isn't that simple but likewise I'm sure a cure isn't rocket science either.

People fall in to these traps because often they are desperate and possibly not of sound state of mind. They hear what they want to hear, as you say.
They need to be protected from themselves because to loose your life can be beyond devastating.
I'm sure some will have even taken their own life after having lost everything.

dunstonh

Would putting more onus on the pension releasing Co to check the credentials of the receiving Co & the facts concerning the dialogue of the transfer help eradicate this?

Funnily enough, the providers tried this. Indeed, several had known blacklists and would go and check when it was a pension they had concerns about. Two problems. 1) the person they checked with was the consumer and the consumer said yes its ok as they couldn't possibly believe they were being scammed by that nice chap that talked for ages about his poor mum... . 2) the providers that took it further were found against by the regulator.

treaclebob

Yes scammers are the scum of the earth.
But there!!!8217;s also the 1950s women who have been deprived of up to £45,000 of their pensions by having their pension age pushed back by up to 6 years with little or no notice and no time to make alternative arrangements...

marlot

treaclebob wrote: »

Yes scammers are the scum of the earth.
But there!!!8217;s also the 1950s women who have been deprived of up to £45,000 of their pensions by having their pension age pushed back by up to 6 years with little or no notice and no time to make alternative arrangements...

Not this one again!

dunstonh

treaclebob wrote: »

Yes scammers are the scum of the earth.
But there!!!8217;s also the 1950s women who have been deprived of up to £45,000 of their pensions by having their pension age pushed back by up to 6 years with little or no notice and no time to make alternative arrangements...

Only the champagne-swilling WASPI nimbies think that rubbish and surely you are not one of those awful people?

Only on planet WASPI can you think that 25 years notice of a phased increase from 60 to 65 equates to short notice.