Pension Company vs Independent Financial advice stitch up !

DJPench

I don't leech of others for info that is easy to find. Why do many pension companies subsidise them and keep them in existence by allowing entry via them as some kind of gatekeeper of standards ?

There should be a basic no nonsense pension. This is capitalism (albeit very little actual labour exploited) and people who leech their ridiculously high salary off your hard earned average UK wage salary are the worst.

DJPench

Any normal pension savvy people on here, not just IFA's and pension company workers ? I am interested to hear your truly independent advice. (not dependent on leeching off my income that is)

dunstonh

Why do many pension companies subsidise them and keep them in existence by allowing entry via them as some kind of gatekeeper of standards ?

Would you care to explain what this subsidy is?

There should be a basic no nonsense pension.

There is. Although the costs are actually higher than many of the pensions retailed via IFAs.

and people who leech their ridiculously high salary off your hard earned average UK wage salary are the worst.

Ok. I think we have bitten on a troll thread.

DJPench

I spoke to an IFA it was the vague-est most dodgy sounding thing ever. Various ways to take fees etc. That IS NOT INDENPENDENT sounding. That sounds like bamboozling people to fleece them.

When their income is dependent on products sales with vague fee scales and ways of taking fees, percentages etc. it is by definition not independent.

dunstonh

When their income is dependent on products sales

Its not. You pay a fee whether you follow the advice or not.

You seem to think that paying an IFA is bad but not a pension company.

So, why not go to Virgin and buy their stakeholder pension at 1%. no IFA involved and a simple product. The fact the IFA can do a pension at 0.34% isnt a problem as its better you pay higher fees to avoid the IFA.

DJPench

I was told that one way of paying the IFA fees (from the horses mouth) depending on what was found in my existing arrangements was a percentage of my year 1 contributions. That was merely 1 suggestion.

Subsidising in that I cannot use that company I chose without going through an IFA, that in itself keeps IFA in business. Online you can find out good and bad performing pension companies.

One example... this is old but will do as an example:

theguardian com/money/2013/aug/21/worst-uk-pension-annuity-named-abi

So it is easy to find better ones by doing a reverse search of that.

Trust me I am not trolling, I am rightly cautious ina market that is not trusted and does not have a great reputation. I am just not planning on getting done over for something that I can probably find out myself with a bit of research and a few willing, truly independent generous people online. Like on here for example.

I don't want to choose what stocks and shares etc. I want safety like 99.9pct of people, rather than risk it for an extra 10pct at the end of the term. I want safety and a close to guaranteed outcome with lowest fees. Not looking for some super risky money making venture... just basic, safe pension like 99.9pct of people in the UK.

Maybe I got annuity wrong.. I mean a guaranteed pay out monthly for 10-15-20 or 30 years depending on if you die quick or not.. who knows?.. That is a good thing to have at the end to at least know your have some form of basic wolves from the doors income. Instead of relying on year on year dwindling savings that are gone when they are gone.

Suggestions of direct dealing companies with a low risk, basic private pension choices highly appreciated.

Linton

DJPench wrote: »

Any normal pension savvy people on here, not just IFA's and pension company workers ? I am interested to hear your truly independent advice. (not dependent on leeching off my income that is)

I am neither an IFA nor a pension company worker and have never worked anywhere near the finance sector. I think you will find that is the case for the majority of contributors here.


My advice is to calm down and devote some of your time to understanding investments, pensions and the personal finance system works. Ranting about something you appear not to understand doesnt help anyone.

dunstonh

I was told that one way of paying the IFA fees (from the horses mouth) depending on what was found in my existing arrangements was a percentage of my year 1 contributions. That was merely 1 suggestion.

Having a number of ways to pay the fee is called choice. The fee is no different whether you pay by cheque, bank transfer, debit card or via the pension. However, via the pension is the most tax efficient way as you get tax relief on your fee.

Subsidising in that I cannot use that company I chose without going through an IFA, that in itself keeps IFA in business. Online you can find out good and bad performing pension companies.

That is not called subsidising. Pension firms do not pay anything to IFAs. They do not keep IFAs in business.

Pension companies have nothing to do with performance. We are not in the 1980s using With Profits funds. You can buy the exact same investments through most of the pension providers and the same investment in each pension will grow exactly the same way.

One example... this is old but will do as an example:

theguardian com/money/2013/aug/21/worst-uk-pension-annuity-named-abi

So it is easy to find better ones by doing a reverse search of that.

It is not only old but it has absolutely nothing to do with buying a pension.

Look I don't want to choose what stocks and shares etc.

That is what you will be doing. When you DIY you pick the investments. The pension provider does not pick for you. You pick the investment funds or the IFA does if you do not want to DIY.

I want safety like 99.9pct of people, rather than risk it for an extra 10pct at the end of the term.

Actually, most people accept investment risk. Generally to a cautious to medium level of investment risk. Going for safety in terms of investment risk actually increases the shortfall risk and inflation risk and is statistically more likely to result in a worse outcome.

Linton

DJPench wrote: »

........

Maybe I got annuity wrong.. I mean a guaranteed pay out monthly for 10-15-20 or 30 years depending on if you die quick or not.. who knows?.. that is a good thing to have at the end to at least know your have some form of basic wolves from the doors income. Instead of relyign on year on year dwindling savings that are gone when they are gone.

You are now talking about annuities - when you say you want a pension do you mean you want to accumulate a pot of money to pay for an annuity at some time in the future or do you mean that you have a pot of money and you want an annuity now? The word "pension" is often used in both cases. People have been assuming that you mean the former.

DJPench

And given the world and the markets they almost certainly stand to lose. Does the future look bright.. No by all accounts armageddon looks more likely than growth.

Finance people love risky things as that is where they earn most, that is why it is pushed. Every time you go bank and they see you have a few quid.. it is .. "ok do you want to see one of our advisors sir to make the most of your money?" (which means tie it up for longer so they can exploit it more and make it more complex for you to get back out ! For some peanuts interest) So they can stick your money in some complex and convoluted bond/account where you have no chance of accessing it when the proverbial hits the fan. (Like when Nothern Rock online accounts were basically locked to owners)

Oh well looks like stuffing it in the bank is best unless some down to earth useful advice comes along by someone generous and not with vested interests.