SIPP Pension Loss

Brynsam

zagfles wrote: »

Well it seems in this case the OP was "egged on" by an IFA. I doubt posters on MSE would have suggested the obscure funds the OP's IFA seems to have recommended. Like I've said before, I'd trust the collective wisdom of this forum over one individual IFA any day (even if the protection isn't as good). This thread is a case in point.

Not for this particular investment, perhaps, but this forum is littered with posters firmly telling novices that 'they need/want/should have a SIPP', often without a clue why they are 'recommending' it other than their mate down the pub said so. In truth many people would be much safer with a stakeholder pension. If they want more flexibility when it comes to drawing benefits, then's the time to look at transferring the funds they've built up in the stakeholder to a properly regulated SIPP.

zagfles

Brynsam wrote: »

Not for this particular investment, perhaps, but this forum is littered with posters firmly telling novices that 'they need/want/should have a SIPP', often without a clue why they are 'recommending' it other than their mate down the pub said so.

Example? I don't recall many posts like that. Someone posters say they want a SIPP and people give recommendation, or give recommendations as to where to start research.

In truth many people would be much safer with a stakeholder pension. If they want more flexibility when it comes to drawing benefits, then's the time to look at transferring the funds they've built up in the stakeholder to a properly regulated SIPP.

What do you mean by "properly regulated SIPP"?

Albermarle

Example? I don't recall many posts like that. Someone posters say they want a SIPP and people give recommendation, or give recommendations as to where to start research.

What I have noticed is that a lot of OP's come on the forum and say' I want to start a new SIPP and then transfer my existing pensions into it ' I think there is an idea that SIPPS are modern and Personal /workplace/stakeholder pensions are old hat , so SIPPS must be better .
If you ask what is wrong with their current arrangements and why is changing to a SIPP so attractive , then you often do not get a very sensible answer, as they have not thought it through.

zagfles

Albermarle wrote: »

What I have noticed is that a lot of OP's come on the forum and say' I want to start a new SIPP and then transfer my existing pensions into it ' I think there is an idea that SIPPS are modern and Personal /workplace/stakeholder pensions are old hat , so SIPPS must be better .
If you ask what is wrong with their current arrangements and why is changing to a SIPP so attractive , then you often do not get a very sensible answer, as they have not thought it through.

Which is a different issue to the supposed "posters firmly telling novices that 'they need/want/should have a SIPP', often without a clue why they are 'recommending' it other than their mate down the pub said so.".

Anyway, let's not hijack the OP's thread further - it would appear he's been misadvised by an IFA, not by MSE posters. When the next thread comes along where someone "firmly tells novices that 'they need/want/should have a SIPP'", reply to that thread and disagree. That's the advantage of open forums vs advice from a lone individual.

Thrugelmir

Albermarle wrote: »

If you ask what is wrong with their current arrangements and why is changing to a SIPP so attractive , then you often do not get a very sensible answer, as they have not thought it through.

The potential return perhaps. A few years of high stock market returns in certain sectors has led people believe that they are missing out. Every year there's new fad. Depending on current events.

dunstonh

I think the OP should name the IFA in question too. It's not private data or libel as it is a statement of fact. It would help us see who it was and provide information on whether this is one of the known dodgy companies and whether they are still trading or not (so whether FOS or FSCS will need to be involved). Plus, any adviser firm recommending unsuitable unregulated investments deserves bad publicity.

no1bert

hi all thanks for your input and comments, it was a company called Asset Harbour management who was the IFA, the phrase if its too good to be true it probably is, is a lesson learned here for me, thankfully for me there is light at the end of the tunnel, whilst it was worth investing the other 2 and losing what I had invested on the 3rd, the other 2 combined has given me the same money back, others however haven't been so fortunate, I am just glad that within the next couple of months both can be transferred out and back into my company pension where I know where it is and what it is doing, safely !

dunstonh

it was a company called Asset Harbour management who was the IFA,

There is no company (past or current) with that name on the FCA register. There is an overseas company (who are not IFAs) with that name.

There is a company in the UK called Asset Harbour. However, they are not IFAs. They are appointed representatives and tied to Vitality Health and Vitality Life. They only became authorised in 2014 (despite their website saying they have been handling clients assets for many years). They only appear to be a mortgage and insurance adviser. Not investment class.

Do you have a postcode of the firm?