Old Mutual

Aged

My pension (which is in drawdown) has been invested with Old Mutual for a few years now, having transferred it from another company which I wasn't happy with. My new (at the time) adviser recommended Old Mutual and I was happy enough with it. However, that adviser firm was taken over and a few months down the line it was mentioned to me that the new adviser wanted to change me away from Old Mutual to another company because (if I remember rightly) Old Mutual 'was more expensive'. Nothing was ever done about it and I was left in limbo for a while. Now that adviser has left the company. I need to get things in order with a new adviser (whoever that may be) but in the meantime I wonder if anyone knowledgeable in these matters could clarify whether it is a good idea to be moving my pension to a new provider or not?

AnotherJoe

That would depend on the charges of old pension and prospective new pension and the investments you would hold in both.

Aged

AnotherJoe wrote: »

That would depend on the charges of old pension and prospective new pension and the investments you would hold in both.

Obvs. I guess my real concern is, isn't it a bad idea to move your pension around from place to place every few years? Isn't that bound to cost you money?

I found this recent FT Adviser article which shows that OM has fallen to 4th place of advisers' favourite pension providers after Royal London, Aviva and Prudential so presumably there's no 'bargepole' situation with them (I think Aviva was the company they suggested I change to).

https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2019/03/06/advisers-favourite-pension-providers-revealed/

AnotherJoe

I don't see why it's "bound to cost you money"
Especially with funds that have the same buy and sell price and no commission t buy. I suppose the issue might be, an adviser woudl charge to move it. Since I DIY I've no experience of whether they would.
I wonder what "advisers favourite" means? That might just mean easier for them to deal with and not, say, lowest charges to you. Or not. Just being cynical.

dunstonh

However, that adviser firm was taken over and a few months down the line it was mentioned to me that the new adviser wanted to change me away from Old Mutual to another company because (if I remember rightly) Old Mutual 'was more expensive'.

That seems reasonable. We are planning to move most of our OMW stuff out in the new tax year. We held off doing it in the last tax year with so many platforms moving to new software and not being ready and bringing in revised charging scales. Plus OMW themselves are moving to new software.

I wonder if anyone knowledgeable in these matters could clarify whether it is a good idea to be moving my pension to a new provider or not?

I probably answered it with the above but OMW charges are in the mid range. Depending on your size of investment it will vary but most are in the 0.3x% range. They have no other charges though. Compared to HL, that isnt bad. However, many IFA platforms are in the 0.2x% range now.

I guess my real concern is, isn't it a bad idea to move your pension around from place to place every few years? Isn't that bound to cost you money?

Very few providers/platforms have initial charges and if you are paying your adviser for ongoing servicing then most will move platforms/providers with no switching/initial charges. So, it can be cost neutral to move.

I found this recent FT Adviser article which shows that OM has fallen to 4th place of advisers' favourite pension providers after Royal London, Aviva and Prudential so presumably there's no 'bargepole' situation with them (I think Aviva was the company they suggested I change to).

Take those sort of things with a pinch of salt. Most advisers dont offer their opinions in these lists and some providers encourage adviser firms to bug them to vote for them whilst others dont.

OMW will be in decline as their software is the old Selestia platform from 2003. They are due to move to FNZ software this year. So, their current software is dated and they are still very much paper based. That will change with FNZ. Despite all that, their software is better than Fidelity!

Pru is niche and an option of failed advice/lazy advice or for someone that is clueless and wishes to remain so.

Royal London was a very good option in its day. It still is if you want a simple unit linked option but it is paper based and in the last year their service levels have fallen. More prone to mistakes than they used to be. Profitshare is a nice touch. So, viable but the shine is beginning to dull.

Aviva, since moving to FNZ software, is much improved. They have got most of their issues sorted now and they are very well priced (many advisers have special terms with Aviva. Default terms are not as good). I never thought I would say it but the Aviva platform is now very good. We use it for some cases and the platform charge is often 0.20-0.27%. (noting that the article says Aviva Life & pensions rather than Aviva platform. Aviva L&P pension products are virtually soft closed. So, not sure how any adviser could vote for them)

Of course, this misses out many other well priced and fully functional options.

Aged

Thank you dunstonh for your insight and explanations, respectfully delivered as always. I can see now that it's perfectly reasonable advice so that has put my mind at rest