Who will accept a DB to SIPP transfer from "insistent client"

Dale72

squirrelpie said:

Probably a silly question, but it seems you have decided that you want to transfer your pension before you have taken advice and despite concluding yourself that the best advice is likely to be to not transfer. What makes you think that your situation is so special that what is actually best and what the advice will recommend are so radically different?

i can only speak about my own experience with this, but several IFAs I spoke to said they would not recommend a transfer out of a DB scheme under any circumstances! Thats without knowing any background info about me. I can't answer why that would be, someone else maybe able to say better the risks an IFA takes when giving advice, or whether these risks take an overly large part in there advice giving process, but when your met with such a blanket refusal, it becomes less about what makes your situation so special and becomes more that you have to take the actual decision about what is best for your financial future.

dunstonh

i can only speak about my own experience with this, but several IFAs I spoke to said they would not recommend a transfer out of a DB scheme under any circumstances! 

They are technically in breach of their regulatory permissions as they should not be pre-judging advice outcomes.  If their company has restrictions in place that only result in that outcome then they are not allowed to refer to themselves as IFAs but as FAs.  FAs are allowed to make restrictions in the advice process.   IFAs are not.        

 I can't answer why that would be, someone else maybe able to say better the risks an IFA takes when giving advice, or whether these risks take an overly large part in there advice giving process, but when your met with such a blanket refusal, it becomes less about what makes your situation so special and becomes more that you have to take the actual decision about what is best for your financial future.

The risk to IFAs and FAs has often been discussed in this section.  So, I wont repeat what is an FAQ.   However, it is pretty much the highest risk transaction that an adviser can carry out.  It comes at the highest cost and could potentially result in the closure of the company. Very few advice transactions come close to it.

Albermarle

Dale72 said:

Antysam said:

Hi 
I’m joining this thread because I’m pretty sure I’m going to be in the same position as quite a lot of people on the thread.I have been referred to a pension transfer specialist (Pensionhelp) by my IFA ,I’ve gone through triage and have my next appointment with Pensionhelp on Tuesday.After doing lots of research I’m 99% certain that recommendation will be a no,If so I want to go down the insistent client route - I have a couple of questions~

Do I need a full advice report to become an insistent client ? 

Or will an abridged advice report do ?
How do I go down the insistent client route? 

Thanks for any advice you have to offer 🙏

Hi, I'm going through the same process at the moment, and I've discovered that abridged advice is not sufficient to meet the legal requirement, even if the abridged advice is not to transfer but you chose to do it anyway, you still need full advice.

I assume  even if the abridged advice is positive , you still also have to go ahead with the full advice, which then might still turn out negative I suppose.
I do not think we have any examples on the forum of that happening so not really sure how that would play out .

Tedlad123

Hi all. In a similar position to a lot of people and will try to edit my query as to not repeat many thousands of the same query but.....I'm 52yrs with a final salary pot of £500K (CETV) which is now 'deferred' as we switched to a company DC pension, this has a current value of around £130K. 
I'll be redundant by end of 2022 with a decent package and will then be 53yrs, job prospects beyond that may or may not be limited to a lesser salary/benefits or no job at all. Will still have a mortgage to pay (£40K O/S). 
My plan was to move the FS out of the company scheme to pay off the mortgage, help the youngest daughter with house purchase/deposit after university and help out the eldest daughter as well as enjoying my 50s while working but it looks like my options are limited unless I can get the favourable approval which obviously starts off as a NO unless I become an insistent client or I can move it into stakeholder pension and then progress from that. I'm not allowed to move the FS into our company DC scheme and my NRA is 65yrs
Questions are : what is so special, if anything, about an "off the shelf" stakeholder pension which my FS would be allowed to be transferred to according to my FS scheme rules, are all stakeholder pensions obliged to take such as transfer, - insistent or not,  the penalties for taking my FS pension early also appear to be restrictive when accumulated over say 5yrs.
I may well get a job near my current salary but in the current and short term future climate who knows.
Also, why do AJ Bell appear to be the only institution that will take insistent clients?
Thanks in advance.

Albermarle

The above poster has asked exactly the same questions in a new thread .................

Dale72

dunstonh said:

They are technically in breach of their regulatory permissions as they should not be pre-judging advice outcomes.  If their company has restrictions in place that only result in that outcome then they are not allowed to refer to themselves as IFAs but as FAs.  FAs are allowed to make restrictions in the advice process.   IFAs are not.        

Hi, dunstonh, is it you I owe the apology to on another thread? I can't find it now, and I'm not sure who it was?

With regard to the IFAs, I did think it was a little strange they were pre judging, but as I had already got the impression that not many people wanted to touch a DB transfer of that value, I didn't really question it and just moved on to the next one.  Ironically the one I ended up with was the very first one that I phoned,HL, who are looking after my existing Sipp. I wasted quite a few weeks trying to save a few quid and find someone more likely to give me a positive answer, all to no avail.

dunstonh

Hi, dunstonh, is it you I owe the apology to on another thread? I can't find it now, and I'm not sure who it was?

I don't know. I cannot remember but these DB threads do have a habit of merging into each other in the brain.

With regard to the IFAs, I did think it was a little strange they were pre judging, but as I had already got the impression that not many people wanted to touch a DB transfer of that value, I didn't really question it and just moved on to the next one.  Ironically the one I ended up with was the very first one that I phoned,HL, who are looking after my existing Sipp. I wasted quite a few weeks trying to save a few quid and find someone more likely to give me a positive answer, all to no avail.

HL are not IFAs.  They are FAs.  They could restrict if they wanted.     Another popular FA service on DB transfers is Fidelity.   The ones to avoid are typically the factory line services. They are the ones that have done the most damage. Yet, ironically, were often the ones that did them on the cheap and quickly.  The sort of firms that those wanting to transfer easily and cheaply are looking for today.

[Deleted User]

Dale72 said:

dunstonh said:

They are technically in breach of their regulatory permissions as they should not be pre-judging advice outcomes.  If their company has restrictions in place that only result in that outcome then they are not allowed to refer to themselves as IFAs but as FAs.  FAs are allowed to make restrictions in the advice process.   IFAs are not.        

Hi, dunstonh, is it you I owe the apology to on another thread? I can't find it now, and I'm not sure who it was?

With regard to the IFAs, I did think it was a little strange they were pre judging, but as I had already got the impression that not many people wanted to touch a DB transfer of that value, I didn't really question it and just moved on to the next one.  Ironically the one I ended up with was the very first one that I phoned,HL, who are looking after my existing Sipp. I wasted quite a few weeks trying to save a few quid and find someone more likely to give me a positive answer, all to no avail.

Don't commit to full advice with HL. 
At the analysis stage, your PTS will flirt with the idea that your case "is marginal." But as soon as you commit to the full process..
You will get a negative recommendation and they'll stick a big charge on you. 

Greed and Fear govern DB pension transfer advice.
Not yours. Theirs.

Tedlad123

Albermarle said:

The above poster has asked exactly the same questions in a new thread .................

Yeah, sorry that was me

Dale72

ZingPowZing said:

Don't commit to full advice with HL. 
At the analysis stage, your PTS will flirt with the idea that your case "is marginal." But as soon as you commit to the full process..
You will get a negative recommendation and they'll stick a big charge on you. 

Greed and Fear govern DB pension transfer advice.
Not yours. Theirs.

I'm expecting a negative recommendation anyway, the reasons for going with them are that their fee is among the lowest, I have an existing good relationship so I trust them, and also, and i'm not sure if this will play any part in their decision, the fact they have access to my previous record in managing my own investments, so can see I'm not a mug.